I 



A N 

ANSWER 

TO THE 
REV. G. S. FABER'S 

DIFFICULTIES 

OF 

ROMANISM, 

BY THE qY* 

Right Rev. J. F. M. TREVERN, D. D. 

BISHOP OF STRASBOURG, 

LATE BP. OF AIRE. 



TRANSLATED BY THE 

REV. F. C. HUSENBETH. 



" Qui estis ? Unde venistis ? .... Habeo origines firmas ab ipsis auto- 
ribus quorum res fuit : Ego sum haeres Apostolorum .... vos 
exhaeredaverunt semper et abdicaverunt ut extraneus, ut inimicos." — 

Te' tullian. L. de Prescript, c. 37. 



LONDON ! 

Hurst, Chance, and Co. 65, St. Paul's Church- yard; 
Booker, 61, Bond-street; 
Keating and Brown, Duke street, Grosvenor-square ; 

NORWICH I 

Bacon and Kinvebrook, 

1828. 



Tenenda nobis est Christiana religio, et ejus Ecclesias 
communicatio, quae Catholica est, et Catholica nominatur, 
non solum a suis, verum etiam ab omnibus inimicis. 

S. Augustin. de vera Relig. Cap. vii. 



BACON AND KINNEBROOK, 
PRINTERS, NORWICH. 



INTRODUCTORY NOTICE. 



In presenting the following work to the public? 
it may be requisite to state the circumstances which 
have led to its composition. They are briefly these. 
Some years ago the Abbe Trevern, formerly Vicar- 
general of Langres, being an emigrant to England 
in consequence of the French Revolution, pub- 
lished in London a French work, in two volumes, 
entitled " Discussion Amicale sur I/Eglise Angli- 
cane, et en general sur la Reformation, dediee 
au clerge de toutes les Communions Protes- 
tantes." When the London edition of this work 
was exhausted, its learned and highly respected 
Author, being then in France, and raised to the 
episcopal see of Aire, published a second edition 
of it in Paris, in the year 1824. An English 
translation of this valuable work has not yet ap- 
peared, but one is on the point of being published 
by the Rev. JVm. Richmond, of Swirinerton Park. 



VI INTRODUCTORY NOTICE. 

It was not till the year 1826 that any attempt 
was made to refute the above masterly composition. 
In that year there appeared a work from the pen 
of a clergyman of the Church of England, of well- 
known talent and erudition, the Rev, G. S. Faber, 
B. D. Rector of Long Newton, bearing for title 
" The Difficulties of Romanism." No sooner 
did the worthy prelate become acquainted with 
this work — which professes to adopt his Lord- 
ship's Discussion Amicale as a text-book, and to 
furnish a refutation of it, than he applied him- 
self with indefatigable exertion to vindicate his 
own book, and answer the alleged Difficulties of 
Mr. Faber' s — and this amid the confusion, 
anxiety, and pressure of affairs of every kind 
attendant upon his Lordship's being translated 
from the see of Aire to that of Strasbourg. The 
good bishop transmitted his work in M.S. as he 
wrote it, to the translator, who now confidently 
presents it to the public. 



C ON TENTS. 



PAGE 



Introduction 1 

PART THE FIRST. 

On the first three Letters of the Discussion Amicale. 

The first Letter 7 

The second Letter 10 

The third Letter 18 

PART SECOND. 

On the Holy Eucharist. 

Chapter the first 94 

Chapter the second — Proofs from Scripture . . IOC 

Chapter the third — Proofs from Tradition .... 125 
First General Proof— the Discipline of the 

Secret 138 

Second General Proof from the Liturgies . . . 181 

Extracts from the Liturgies 200 

General Proof from the Catecheses. 

Chapter the fourth — Particular Proofs from 

the Fathers 231 

St. Clement of Alexandria 265 

Theodoret 269 

St. Chrysostom and St. Augustin 275 



viii 



CONTENTS. 



PART THE THIRD. 

PAGE 

Succinct Review of the Difficulties of Romanism 319 

Introductory Statement 321 

Celibacy „ 325 

Tradition 327 

Real Presence 332 

Characters of the first Reformers 351 

Confession 365 

Satisfaction 374 

Indulgences 381 

Prayers for the Dead — Purgatory 390 

Invocation of the Saints 406 

Relics 413 

Sign of the Cross 416 

Church of England 419 

Supremacy 422 

Re-union 427 

Inquisition 435 

Intolerance 444 

Recapitulation 450 

Conclusion 451 

Translator's Note 459 



ANSWER, &c. 



My dear Sir, 

^Tou have so earnestly requested me to reply 
to the work lately published by the Rev. G. S. 
Faber, B. D. against my Discussion Amicale, 
that I should be truly deserving of reproach if I 
refused to comply. The only difficulty attending 
your request arose from my rinding it impos- 
sible to reconcile the labour required with the 
occupations of governing a diocese. My necessary 
resolve was to interrupt the latter for a time, 
when I reflected on the one hand that the refuta- 
tion had appeared to you peremptory and con- 
clusive, and understood on the other that my 
silence would be interpreted by your country- 
men as the tacit avowal of a defeat. You assure 
me that the attack directed in my person against 
the doctrine 1 profess, issued from a celebrated 

B 



2 ANSWER TO THE 

pen, from the first even of your controvertists. 
Well, Sir, I congratulate you upon it : the repu- 
tation and talents of such an antagonist will 
only add greater splendour to the truth. I trust 
that ere long you will see the arguments of your 
renowned theologian fall before you, one after 
another, without force or effect ; and the proofs 
developed in my work remained still unshaken 
after the appearance of his. And then 1 hope 
you will yourself conclude that the Faith of the 
Catholic Church is impenetrable to the shafts of 
its enemies. 

In the first letter you did me the honour 
to address to me, I was informed that your 
learned friend had engaged to refute my work ; 
that he purposed following me step by step, and 
shewing on each point that I had uniformly 
built upon a vain illusion, by believing myself 
always supported by the Scriptures and the Pri- 
mitive Church. This plan was certainly the 
only methodical one, and at the same time the 
fairest and best calculated to exhibit the truth 
with the strongest evidence. You assured me 
that such was the plan to be adopted by my anta- 
gonist. Imagine then my surprise, my dear Sir, 
when as I looked over his refutation, I found 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 3 

that instead of proceeding step by step after me, 
instead of adhering to the arrangement which I 
had adopted for the various questions, he had 
preferred abandoning it altogether, displacing 
the questions, and putting those in front, which 
ought only to have appeared in the rear. A 
writer of the penetration you profess to find in 
him, ought undoubtedly to have been sensible 
how much strength is acquired by proofs when 
properly connected with each other, and how 
much they lose by being separated. 

Although Mr. Faber and myself are widely 
divided in opinion, the same motive has led each 
to take up the pen — that of convincing your 
countrymen : our great opposition is in our res- 
pective objects. Mine was to make them sensible 
of the reasons which ought to lead them back to 
unity ; his, on the contrary, was to exhibit those 
which might still farther remove them from it. 
I strive to persuade to re-union : he endeavours 
to perpetuate dissension. I consider that you 
would gain every thing by becoming again what 
you once were ; he thinks, on the other hand, that 
you have every thing to lose, if you do not remain 
what you are. Which of us has the more effec- 
tually pleaded his cause, or rather your cause ? 

B 2 



4 



ANSWER TO THE 



Our judges are those for whom we have written. 
Our books are the cause to be tried. Let them 
not consider their authors, but weigh well their 
respective arguments. 

In the comparison 1 solicit, I see at once that 
my antagonist has a powerful advantage over 
me ; he expresses himself in the language of the 
interested party, while I write in a language to 
which the greater number are strangers. I en- 
treat those nevertheless who understand both, 
to compare the Discussion Amicale with the Dif- 
ficulties of Romanism, and impartially to weigh 
our proofs. This labour will no doubt cost 
them application and patience. I solicit them 
to bestow it for the honour of truth, in the name 
of their dearest interests, of their happiness in 
this world and the next. 

Do not expect me, Sir, to enter at length upon 
all the questions which divide us ; upon the 
motives which establish the truth of the Catholic 
faith ; its conformity, whether with the natural 
light of human reason, or with the text of 
Holy Scripture, or the doctrine and practice of 
the primitive Church : consequently the neces- 
sity of adopting it, namely, of renouncing a pre- 
tended reformation, equally null in its establish- 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 5 

merit, and erroneous in its doctrine. This would 
be a labour far exceeding the leisure allowed 
by my habitual occupations ; and would be to 
recommence what I have already published, 
and transcribe the Discussion Amicale almost 
throughout. It is a more simple plan to refer 
you to that work, by pointing out the volume 
and page.* You will there find the proofs I 
have developed on the contested points ; I make 
bold to assure you that they still remain in all 
their strength, and that the Difficulties of 
Romanism, however specious it may have ap- 
peared to you, has not made any real attack 
upon them. 

I shall confine myself, therefore, to placing 
again before your view some of the more impor- 
tant articles, witli an analysis of the proofs and 
objections which the Rev. Mr. Faber brings 
against them. To this I shall dedicate the first 
and second parts of this Reply : they will suf- 
fice, 1 conceive, to j ustify my assertions, to rec- 
tify the judgment you have formed of them, 
and to confirm the triumph of the Catholic 
Creed. In the third part, I shall take a review 

* These will be cited from the more correct edition, pub- 
lished in Paris, by Potey, No. 46. Rue du Bac. 1824. 



6 ANSWER TO THE 

of the false suppositions, wrong intepretations, 
mistakes, reproaches, disposition to ill-humour, 
and hostile indications, which I have unfortu- 
nately, but too frequently, met with in The 
Difficulties of Romanism, 



PART I.] 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



7 



PART THE FIRST. 



ON THE FIRST THREE LETTERS OF THE DISCUSSION 
A MIC ALE. 



The first Letter places before the reader an 
historical summary of the establishment of the 
Church of England. It exhibits Elizabeth, autho- 
rized by her Parliament, driving out of their sees 
those Bishops who, with a single exception, op- 
posed her assumptions ; and replacing them with 
men servile and accommodating, chosen from the 
second order of the clergy. Dux fcemina facti. 
It is nevertheless incontestable that Jesus Christ 
confided the government of his church, as well 
as the teaching of his doctrine, to the Apostles 
and their successors, and by no means to the 
potentates of the earth. It is true therefore that 
a radical defect of competent authority rendered 
null the work of Elizabeth, and her two houses 
of parliament, who formed, if you will, a parlia- 
mentary and royal church, but assuredly not 
one canonically Christian.* 

* Humanam conati sunt facere Ecclesiam, would be here 
repeated by St. Cyprian. (Ep. 52.) 



8 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

Apply again with me, Sir, to the unhappy 
schism of 1559, what your learned doctor wrote 
against that of 1689, and which ought, with 
much greater reason, to have disgusted him with 
the assumption of Elizabeth. Listen to this 
able theologian : "A decree was made by a 
" senate of laymen, that the bishops who refused 
44 to take the new oaths should be ejected out of 
44 their places. The time for taking them being 
44 expired, and these fathers refusing them, they 
44 are deprived of their palaces, revenues, in short, 
44 of all the rights annexed to their episcopal 
44 office. Hitherto we complained not. Let the 
" secular hand reassume, if it pleases, what it 
44 has bestowed upon the church. This may 
44 hurt the temporal estates of the bishops, but 
44 can never affect the consciences of subjects : 
44 for Christ has laid no obligation upon us to 
64 assert the legal rights of bishops, in opposition 
44 to the magistrate ; but certainly he has obliged 
64 us to assert those rights, which he himself be- 
" stowed upon the church, in order to preserve 
44 it under persecution ; and which no earthly 
64 power ever gave, or was able to give. And yet 
" the violence of our adversaries proceeded so 
44 far ! Our reverend fathers were driven at last 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 9 

" from the very cure of souls ; altars opposite 
" to theirs erected, and bishops, of an adverse 
" party, thrust into their places. Though they 
" were alive, their seats were filled, and filled 
" by colleagues, before they were vacant, before 
" their predecessors were deprived of episcopal 
" power by bishops who had authority to do it. 
" Upon this account we looked upon the obe- 
" dience we owed them to be still valid, nor 
" could we transfer it to their successors, who 
" had departed from Catholic unity, from Christ 
" himself and all his benefits, according to the 
" doctrine of St. Cypriarv's age." % 

Such is, word for word, the history of the 
deplorable overthrow effected in 1559 : and thus 
ought all those to have spoken respectfully, but 
firmly, whose misfortune it was to witness it. 
Such is the language of every man of enlightened 
understanding, who knows what are true cano- 
nical principles — the distinction of the two 
powers, and their boundaries — what belongs to 
the one and to the other. It will ever be the 
manifest condemnation of Elizabeth and her 
parliament. Mr. Faber appears to have been 
sensible of this, since he has not attempted to 
* Dodwell on the late Schism. London, If 04, pp. 4, 5. 



10 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX 

contradict it. He has done honour to his judg- 
ment and prudence, by keeping silence upon 
the conclusions at the end of my first letter. 
Those alone ought to suffice at this day to bring 
back England to unity. The establishment of 
her Church once found to be null in its origin, 
will be null for ever. Two centuries and a 
half have already passed over the actual state 
of things : ten more might pass, but they would 
never render that valid and legitimate which 
was not so the first day of its existence. There 
is no prescription against Heaven. 

After having related the origin of your 
Established Church, and shewn its essential 
defect, I pass in my second Letter to the exa- 
mination of its doctrine. The end of my whole 
discussion is to shew — 1st. That an absolute 
necessity, stronger than every obstacle and re- 
pugnance, renders it obligatory to put an end 
to the schism, by returning to the mother church. 
2dly. To prove that all the pretexts and griev- 
ances alleged to justify separation from that 
church, or to retain people at a distance from it, 
far from being founded on scripture or primitive 
tradition, are most certainly in opposition to 
them. I begin then by demonstrating — and 



PART r.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. H 

there is no exaggeration in the expression — that 
the church is essentially one, that there can 
never be a motive for breaking unity with her, 
and that to depart from unity, is by the very 
act, departing from the Church of Jesus Christ. 
Here proofs of every kind combine to exalt to 
the highest degree of certainty this fundamental 
truth, entirely decisive between our separated 
brethren and ourselves : both the natural light 
of the human mind, and the design and precepts 
of our Saviour, the Father and Creator of this 
light ; the doctrine of all the apostles* and 
their disciples, doctors or bishops, as well in 
their particular writings, as in their decisions 
in council ; the practice of the church, and 
the order of its government pursued from the 
beginning ; and finally, the testimonies even of 
those who broke unity in the 16th century, and 
of those who in support of that particular re- 
formed party in which they were born, never 
ceased to thunder against those who dissented 
from them.f 

* God is not the God of dissention, but of peace: as also I 
teach in all the churches. 1 Corinth, xiv. 33. And all the 
apostles like St. Paul, since their teaching was the same, and 
upon this point St. Jude testifies it expressly of all. 

+ I have quoted these various authorities in my second letter 



12 ANSWER TO THE [ PART 

I have collected in my second Letter a number 
of texts on this great question, which appear to 
me well calculated to make an indelible impres- 
sion upon my readers. Yes, Sir, if I do not de- 
ceive myself, whoever among your countrymen 
is faithfully in search of the truth, will there 
clearly see, as I venture to assure him, that truth 
can never be found in schism and separation. 

from page 53 to 60. I will here add the following to the 
celebrated Theologians of your church: "The King" (says 
Casaubon of James the First) "plainly believes, without fallacy 
" or deceit, that there is but one true church, called Catholic 
" or Universal, out of which he holds that no salvation is to be 
" expected. He detests those who in old times and afterwards 
" either departed from the faith of the church, and so became 
" heretics ; or departing from her communion became schis- 
" matics." How was it possible to speak so well, and yet not 
apply his principles to the transactions of the preceding reign ? 
How was it that James the First was not sensible of the strict 
obligation of honestly labouring to bind again the bond of unity? 
What did it profit him to wear so rich and noble a crown during 
a mortal life in the midst of the schism, if he knew it to be such ? 
"The ark out of which all perished," says Mr. Perkins, "was 
"an emblem of the church militant, out of which all are con- 
" demned : out of the militant church there being no means of 
"salvation, no preaching, no sacraments, and by consequence 
" no salvation." On the Revelation^ p. 308. 

"If the Church of Rome," says Tillotson (T. 6, p. 245) 
" be the Catholic Church, it is necessary to be of that com- 
" munion ; because out of the Catholic Church there is no ordi- 
" nary possibility of salvation." 



part ft] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 13 

Shall I only recal to your remembrance those 
words twice repeated by our Divine Saviour in 
the admirable prayer which he made to his 
Father in the midst of his Apostles, the evening 
before his passion ? " That they all may be 
" one," said he, 44 that the world may believe 
" that thou has sent me. That is to say, that 
" all those who may hereafter believe my word, 
" and the preaching of my Apostles, may be one 
44 among themselves, as thou and I Father ! are 
44 one : in order that by the agreement of their 
44 faith, by their adherence to the same pastors, 
44 their perseverance in the same church, they 
44 may prove to all the faithful that my mission 
44 came from thee. For thou alone, O Father ! 
44 canst command the minds and hearts of men ; 
44 thou alone canst bring them to uniformity of 
44 belief, and retain them in it. At this spectacle, 
44 hitherto unknown upon the earth, the infidels 
44 will feel thy power and thy sweet influence, 
44 and will come to adore thee at the feet of the 
44 same altars. Let them be o?ie, that the world 
44 may know that thou hast truly sent me \" 

Tell me, Sir, can you ever be persuaded that 
any man can love our amiable and adorable 
Saviour, and remain insensible to this moving 



14 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

prayer? That any one can be zealous for his glory, 
and yet be pleased with divisions, and oppose 
the accomplishment of his wishes ? That it is 
possible to desire the extension of his kingdom, 
and yet arrest its progress by word and example ? 
To wish that his divine mission should be dis- 
played in the intimate union of all his followers, 
and yet by laborious efforts to retain Christians 
at a distance from one another, and by rash and 
often calumnious accusations prevent them from 
religiously giving each other the hand, and be- 
coming again among themselves what they were 
iti the days of peace and confraternity ? 

I seriously invite my reverend antagonist to 
weigh in his heart and before God the considera- 
tions which arise from the sublime prayer of our 
Saviour. I entreat him moreover to dwell some 
moments on these words of the celebrated Pro- 
testant Claude, to Dr. Henchman, Bishop of 
London, in 1680, on occasion of the Dissenters 
in that extensive diocese: " Evidently/ 5 he 
wrote, " their conduct is equivalent to a positive 
" schism, a crime detestable in itself both to God 
" and man. Those who are guilty of it, whether 
" by first establishing it themselves, or continuing 
" to enforce it among others, must expect to 



part I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 15 

" have a terrible account to render at the great 
" day of judgment." Claude did not perceive 
that he himself was at the head of a party of Dis- 
senters whose origin and schism came from 
Calvin ! He was not sensible that he himself 
was continuing tc maintain this schism among 
his partisans ! and he did not apply to himself 
what he said with so much justice of his imitators 
present and future, that they must expect to 
have to render a terrible account ! What aston- 
ishing blindness ! How cau we consider it 
but as a just visitation from above? But why 
should this unhappy Claude rind imitators 
even in our days ? Why must we even now 
have the pain of witnesssng an able writer 
sharing his inconsistency ; proclaiming like him 
the enormity of schism, and like him taking up 
his pen or raising his voice to attach the people 
to it more firmly ? Let him prove then at the 
same time either that Elizabeth and her clergy 
did not break unity ; or that out of unity, and 
in schism, we can secure our salvation. Neither 
he, nor any one in the world, will ever prove 
either. 

I must however remark, to his praise, — and it 
is a consolation to me to make it public, — that 



16 ANSWER TO THE [PART I. 

he appears to have felt the force of the proofs 
which fill my second Letter. Had he found them 
defective, he would not have hesitated to object 
to them. I take authority from his silence to 
say, that on the decisive question of unity we 
are both agreed. What I truly deplore is, that 
while he admits the principle with all the Pro- 
testant communions, he rejects with them its 
essential and immediate consequence, though he 
prides himself on logical exactness. This con- 
sequence ought long ago to have led him and 
them to that tribunal of Divine creation, which 
Jesus Christ has erected in his church, to pre- 
serve the faithful in unity. The establishment 
of this tribunal, and the obligation of submitting 
to it, are the subjects of the Letter following. 

When it is once demonstrated, and acknow- 
ledged on all sides that the precept of unity is 
indispensable, and of rigorous obligation upon 
all Christians, it must be believed that our 
Divine Legislator has given us the means of ob- 
serving it. Now this means, since personal in- 
spiration has ceased, can be no other for us all, 
than the establishment of a supreme tribunal, 
which has the right of declaring what is revealed, 
and what is not ; and which, itself secured from 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 17 

error, will also preserve us from it while subject 
to its decisions. If such a means does not 
exist, then we have no means whatever of obey- 
ing Jesus Christ on this essential point. Without 
this tribunal, it is impossible for us ever to 
remain united ; with it, we can never be other- 
wise. If the New Testament had never been 
written, we ought still to have believed in the 
institution of this ancient authority, and admit- 
ted it as the necessary effect of a known cause, 
and the evident consequence of an acknowledged 
principle. Both are inseparably bound bv a 
chain, impalpable, but indestructible. 

This method of reasoning is not at all to the 
taste of Mr. Faber. There was one way, and 
only one of refuting it : he should have proved 
that without acknowledging an infallible autho- 
rity, Christians can always remain in unity of 
faith. But neither he, nor any other upon earth, 
will discover such a proof. The passions of men 
and the experience of ages will eternally appear 
in opposition to it. What then is his resource 
to furnish a refutation ? At first he professes 
not to perceive the intimate relation and con- 
nexion between the precept of unity, and the 

c 



18 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

necessary existence of an infallible tribunal. He 

takes infallibility separately, as if persuaded 
that by keeping it apart from unity, he can 
attack it with greater advantage. He therefore 
passes over my second Letter like the first, and 
enters at once into discussion with the third. 
We shall soon see whether his attempt is crowned 
with success ; but it is curious enough to ob- 
serve how, after so often repeating that, he should 
take my work for his text, he passes over in 
silence the first hundred pages ! 

It is true, however, that farther on he glances 
at the first argument of my third Letter ; and 
at page 39 he has chosen to say a few words 
upon it without finding fault. Here however he 
appears to disapprove of the observation I made in 
these words, " God commands us to preserve 
" unity in religion ; therefore he has furnished 
" us with the means of so doing." This mode 
of concluding a priori appears to him too 
hazardous, too bold and venturesome. And yet 
no one more freely yields than himself to the 
dictates of his own reason. He very often de- 
lights in putting whole pages of my book into 
form, into syllogisms suitable to his purpose, 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 19 

and intentionally so turned as to introduce 
what he intends to object to me. Nay more ; 
in the same chapter, page 38, he forgets what he 
has just blamed, and pleads himself in favour of 
theological reasoning : 44 we shall introduce/' 
says he, 44 an universal scepticism, if we deny 
44 the right of forming a private judgment upon 

44 perfectly unambiguous propositions In 

44 these matters, and in various others which 
44 might easily be specified, 1 hold private judg- 
44 ment to be strictly legitimate ; and I feel per- 
44 suaded that the Bishop of Aire will not dis- 
44 agree with me/' Well, Sir, do you find any 
ambiguity in the propositions which I have 
advanced, on the absolute necessity of a supreme 
authority ? Are they not on the contrary as 
clear as the light ? I had a right then, according 
to Mr. Faber himself, to make use of them, and 
he was wrong; in censuring me for it. 

After declaring what reason suggests on 
the necessity of a supreme tribunal, I come 
to the authorities which demonstrate its real 
existence. It is Jesus Christ who teaches it ; 
his apostles and their successors ; the con- 
viction which ever animates the Church, and 

c 2 



20 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

directs her dogmatical decisions in councils. 
These proofs brought together demonstrate 
that in fact this tribunal, the propriety of 
which good sense alone had ascertained, was 
positively established by Jesus Christ. I beg 
those who have at hand the Difficulties of 
Romanism, to compare the 2d chapter of the 
first book with my third Letter. Mr. Faber 
saw very plainly the force and developement 
of the proofs which I there adduced, and 
he does not even endeavour to destroy them ! 
He contents himself with advancing that I 
do not reason according to the promises and 
expressions of our Lord, but from the inter- 
pretations which I give to them. Judge, Sir, 
between us ; are not the following words clear 
and positive declarations — " Go ye therefore 
" and teach all nations : teaching them to ob- 
" serve all things whatsoever I have commanded 
" you : and behold I am with you all days, even 
" to the consummation of the world }"* What 
need here of arbitrary interpretations ? How 
can these words be susceptible of opposite expo- 



* St. Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. 



PART I ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 21 

sitions ?* Jesus Christ promises his apostles 
and their successors to the end of the world that 
he will assist them, when they shall teach the 
precepts which he has given them. Can it enter 
any sensible head, that error can corrupt that 
teaching which is directed by our Saviour him- 
self? And when he says to them, I will ask 
" the Father, and he will give you another 
" Paraclete : when he shall come, the spirit of 
" truth, he shall teach you all truth. " Can 
there be any fear of pernicious mixture in doc- 
trine where the Holy Spirit resides, and teaches 
all truth ? What is wanting to the clearness of 
these magnificent promises ? What need have 
they of any interpretation ? And above all, 
how can they be interpreted in an opposite 
sense ? Truly there are certain unfortunate 
minds, for which no human language is suffici- 
ently plain. Tell them further with St. Paul 
that the Church of God is the pillar and ground 
of truth ; they will reply that doubtless it was 
so in the time of the apostles, but that in our 
days we behold this pillar on the contrary sur- 

* See Bossuet, Corollaire de la Defense du Clerge Gall, 
parag. 8, and Dissertation Prelimin. parag. 21. 



22 ANSWER TO THE [part I* 

mounted by a group of errors. Have then the 
gates of hell prevailed against the Church ? Has 
Jesus Christ ceased to be with her ? Has he 
withdrawn his Holy Spirit, and failed to accom- 
plish his word ? No, no, my dear Sir, far be 
such blasphemy from us ; we know that the 
world will pass away, but that his word will 
not pass away. Let us hold fast his brilliant 
promises ; and pity every communion which 
rejects them, which prides itself on having no 
connexion with them, and by that alone cuts 
itself off from the body of Jesus Christ. Let us 
deplore the blindness of those who invent inter- 
pretations opposite to the promises given to the 
Church, only because they are determined, in 
spite of every proof, never to re-enter her 
bosom. 

" That the privilege of infallibility resides in 
" the Catholic Church/ 5 saj^s Mr. Faber at the 
beginning of his discussion, page 10, "is strenu- 
" ously maintained : but as to the precise quarter 
44 where it is to be found, there is not the same 
c4 unanimity. 55 He goes on to say, that some 
hold it to reside in the Pope, and others in a 
general council : and adds, page 12, 44 Under 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 23 

" such circumstances, if the prerogative of in- 
" fallibility belong to the church, ice must seek 
" its residence elsewhere than in the person of 
the Pope." A truth too striking* for nie to wish 
to dispute. But let him listen to one reproach 
which he very often deserves. He sets out with 
saying, and repeats again and again, that he 
chooses the Discussion Amicale for his text, and 
that it is his intention to comment upon it from 
beginning to end. And yet at page 224 of the 
1st volume, I insert this objection at length, 
and give its solution : he takes no notice of this 
whatever. He forgets his engagement with the 
public and with myself. I can no longer dis- 
cover his purpose. Fie must be satisfied with 
my referring both himself and his readers 
to my book, I will here only sum up my 
answer in a few words. " The general ac- 
" ceptation of the bishops dispersed over the 
" world assures us that a council is really 
" oecumenical or universal : by them also are 
" we made certain that the Pope has pronounced 
■ : ex cathedra. Thus we Catholics agree per- 
" fectly in the same principle ; and in reality 
" we on both sides attach the seal of infallibility 



24 ANSWER TO THE [PART I. 

" to universal consent" This, I conceive, is all 
that needs be said in reply to this formidable 
objection. 

The opinion of those who place infallibility 
in a general council, appears best to suit the taste 
of Mr. Faber. But unluckily says he, 44 from 
44 faithful history we learn, that general councils, 
44 upon points both of doctrine and practice, 
44 have decided in plain and avowed opposition 
44 to each other. " He is not the first who has 
made this assertion : but certainly if he had 
been able to prove it, he would have been the 
first who had succeeded in so doing. It is 
curious to observe how he proceeds in his demon- 
stration. He takes two councils, one of which 
was from the beginning rejected by the whole 
of the West, and soon after by the universal 
Church : and the other immediately approved 
by it. He wonders to find them teaching op- 
posite doctrines, as if he had honestly expected 
to find them unanimous. Truly I lament 
that this pitiful objection should be revived 
in these days. There is not a student in our 
seminaries who does not know that the Conci- 
liabulum of Constantinople in 754 was never 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 25 

acknowledged.* Every difficulty, once solved, 
should be consigned to oblivion : it is unworthy 
of a man of learning to mention it again. It 
may deceive the illiterate ; but in the end it will 
disgrace that man in the eyes of both parties, 
who flattered himself that he could still turn 
it to the credit of his own. 

In support of the pretended opposition be- 
tween general councils, of which he has selected 
such an unlucky example, I rind him inserting 
long historical notes, which, I am sorry to say, 
are complete in every thing except applicability 
and truth. Mr. Faber discovers in the South of 
Spain, in the small town of Elvira, a council of 
nineteen bishops, who forbid painting the God- 
head on the walls of their churches ; and by a 

* " How could it be a general council, when it was neither 
" received, nor approved, but on the contrary, anathematized 
" by the bishops of other churches — when neither concurred in 
66 by the Pope, nor by the bishops about him, nor by legates, 
" nor by a circular letter according to the usage of councils ? 
a Which had not the consent of the patriarchs of the East, of 
u Alexandria, Antioch, or Jerusalem, nor of the bishops de- 
" pendent upon them ?" Extractedfrom the Refutation of this 
Conciliabulum, read in the 6th session of the 2d Council of Nice. 
See Fleury's Church Hist. vol. 6th, book 44, § 36, of the quarto 
edition, printed at Caen. 



26 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

very illogical way of arguing, concluding twice 
from particulars to universals^ he deduces from 
this prohibition two false conclusions. The first, 
that it was forbidden to paint on the walls any 
kind of pictures : the second, that in the first 
ages of Christianity not only was the veneration 
of images and pictures unknown^ but even that 
their introduction into churches was forbidden. 
Mr. Faber would have reasoned otherwise if he 
had taken St. John Damascen for his guide, who 
was so famous in the grand dispute about 
images : " We know," says he, " what can, and 
" what cannot be represented by images. How 
" can an image be made of Him who has no 
" body ? But since he became man, you may 
" make a representation of his human form, of 
" his nativity, of his baptism, his tran figuration, 
" his cross, his burial, his resurrection, or ascen- 
" sion. Express all these by colours as well as 
" by words ; be not afraid." The first conse- 
quence deduced by Mr. Faber from the council 
of Elvira is therefore false. Must we say the 
same of the second ? Let us refer it to the deci- 
sion of St. Basil. " I receive the apostles," he 
wrote to Julian, " the prophets and the martyrs. 



PART I] 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



27 



" I invoke them to pray for me, and that by their 
" intercession, God may be merciful to me, and 
" forgive my trangressions. For this reason I 
" revere and honour their images ; especially 
" since we are taught to do so (this is addressed 
at once to Mr. Faber) "by the tradition of the 
" holy apostles ; and so far from these being 
" forbidden us, they appear in our churches."* 
Mr. Faber read this passage, with many others, 
in the Discussion Amicale, vol. 2, page 364 ; 
but he passes them all over in silence, and is 
unwilling to make them known to those whom 
he undertakes to instruct. 

The following is of the highest antiquity ; and 
I wish to retrace it before my readers, first, because 
he has considered it prudent to withhold it from 
his ; and secondly, because when we undertake to 
enlighten mankind, there is no need of conceal- 

* In 814 Leo, the Armenian, at that time the disguised 
patron of the Iconoclasts, assembled several bishops in order to 
induce them to break pious images. Euthymius, metropolitan 
of Sardes, thus addressed him : " Know, Sire, that for 800 
" years and more since Jesus Christ came into the world, he 
" has been painted and adored in his image. Who will be 
" bold enough to abolish so ancient a tradition :" — Who ? the 
Rector of Long Newton. — See Fleury, vol. 7. b. 46. § 13. 
Quarto edit, of Caen. 



28 ANSWER TO THE [part i. 

ing from them the truth. Tertullian, when 
driven to the excess of rigour by the in- 
flexibility of his character, reproached the 
Catholics with having absolved adulterers, and 
defended such indulgence by the words of the 
good Shepherd represented in painting, or in 
relief upon the chalices. " Let us now," he 
resumes, " produce the pictures upon the cha- 
" lices." # It was at the close of the second 
century that he spoke thus of this figure painted 
or engraved, as of a common ornament. Would 
it be an unwarrantable presumption to attribute 
its origin to the days of the apostles ? In the 
stormy centuries of reviving persecutions, the 
Church possessing neither temples, nor oratories, 
had not been able to fix pictures or images on 
the walls or altars, in the same manner as she 
did later. But she had portable ones on the 
chalices, such as alone were suitable to her 
uncertain and fluctuating situation. This sen- 
tence of Tertullian, let fall by the way, and 
without any regular design, appeared to me in 
1812, a ray of light for our cause. I have since 



* Lib. de Pudic. ch. 7. 



Part t.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 29 

had the satisfaction to see the same view of it 
taken by Leibnitz, the most penetrating and 
universal genius of the reformation.* 

I again feel compelled against my inclination 
to re-establish a fact mutilated by the faithful 
and modest pen of my antagonist, who thinks 
himself justified in praising a Bishop of Mar- 
seilles for what St. Gregory the Great found wor- 
thy of censure, and in blaming with contempt the 
decision of one of the greatest lights who have 
governed the Church. Such a forgetfulness of 
all that is becoming would cause disgust, if it 
were not still more calculated to excite pity. 
Read what follows, Sir, I beseech you, and say 
if you think me too severe: — " I have learnt," 
writes this great Pope to Serenus, " that seeing 
" some persons adore the images in the church, 
" you have broken them : I commend your zeal 
" for preventing the adoration of things made 

* Et quanquam sub initio Christianismi, aut nullas aut 
perraras fuisse imagines, probabilius videatur, (unius enim ima- 
ginis Christi, sub habitu boni pastoris ovem errantem requi- 
rentis, sacris calicibus iusculpti mentio reperitur apud Tertulli- 
anum) paulatini tamen fuisse receptas negari non potest." — - 
Sgst. Theolog. p. 13% Edit. Paris. 1819. 



SO ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

" by the hand of man. But I am of opinion 
" that you ought not to have broken these 
" images ; for pictures are placed in the churches 
(observe the general custom) " in order that 
" those who cannot read, may see upon the walls 
" what they cannot learn in books. You ought 
" therefore to have preserved them, and deterred 
" the people from sinning by adoring the paint- 
" ing" — And in a second letter, " Shew the 
" people by the Holy Scripture, that it is not 
44 lawful to adore what has been made by the 
44 hand of man ; and add, that seeing the lawful 
44 use of images turned into adoration, you be- 
" came indignant and broke them. If you will, 
" you can further say — I willingly allow you to 
" have images in the church for your instruc- 
" tion, for which purpose they were made in 

"former days If any one wishes to make 

44 images, do not hinder him : only forbid the 
44 adoration of them. The sight of the historical 
44 representations ought to move them to com- 
44 punction ; but they ought only to bow down 
44 to adore the Holy Trinity. I say all this to 
44 you out of the love I have for the church ; not 
44 to weaken your zeal, but to encourage you in 



Part I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 31 

" your duty."* Could any one convey a more 
sensible admonition, or one at the same time 
more paternal ? And yet the Rector of Long 
Newton does not blush to call this a decision 
wretchedly injudicious ! 

I am happy to be able to present to him a judge 
whom doubtless he will not refuse. Leibnitz 
himself shall speak : I regret that I cannot give 
at length the judgment of this great man on the 
subject of images.-]* "As to the veneration of 
" images, it cannot be denied that the Christians 
" abstained from it a long time through fear of 
" superstition, while they were mixed with the 
" pagans. But at length when the worship of 
" demons was destroyed in the greater part of 
" the known and civilized world, even grave 
" men found no longer any reason for excluding 
" images from being used in the worship of the 
" true God, since they are the alphabet of the 
" unlearned, and a powerful motive to excite 
" the common people to devotion. It must be 
" observed that a double honour is paid to 

* The first letter of St. Gregory the Great to Serenus, 
Bishop of Marseilles, in the year 599. The second in 600. 
+ See his Syst. Theol. p. 121. 



32 ANSWER TO THE Part i] 

" images : one kind which belongs to the image, 
" as when it is placed in a remarkable and 
" honourable situation, set off with ornaments, 
" surrounded with lighted tapers, or carried in 
" procession ; and in this I see no great diffi- 
" cult j. The other kind of honour is that which 
44 is referred to the original. When for example, 
44 it is kissed, when people uncover their heads 
44 before it, or bend their knees, or prostrate, 
44 or offer prayers, or vows, or praises or thanks- 
44 givings : but in reality, although they are 
44 accustomed to talk of paying homage to the 
44 image ; it is not the lifeless thing incapable of 
44 honour, but the original which they honour 
44 before the image.* No one with sound sense 
44 will say and think, 4 grant me, O image, what 
44 I ask ; and to thee, O marble or wood, I return 
44 thanks f but 4 it is thou O Lord whom I adore, 
44 and whose praises I publish.' .... I see no 

* " If it were possible in human language to express our- 
" selves with rigorous precision, instead of the veneration of 
" images, we should say veneration of saints before their 
" images." See Discussion Amicale, vol. 2, p. 348. Let any 
one be at the pains of comparing my 16th letter with Leibnitz, 
and they will see that I have had the happiness of falling in 
exactly with that profound thinker. 



PART l ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 33 

" evil in prostrating before a crucifix, and when 
" looking upon it, honouring him whom it 
" represents. But the advantage of it is evident ; 
" since it is incontestable that this action won- 
" derfully excites the affections ; and we have 
" seen that it was customary with St. Gregory 
" the Great." (We have seen it too with St. 
Basil.) " Those who follow the confession of 
" Augsbourg are not entirely opposed to this 
" custom : and certainly if we did not know 
" that there were formerly great abuses in the 
" veneration of images, which have rendered 
" suspicious a thing good in itself ; if we did 
" not know the animated disputes which have 
" arisen on this point, and even in our own days ; 
" no one perhaps would have thought of sus- 
" peering any concealed evil in the veneration 
" paid before an image, or any danger, or cause 
" of scruple ; so innocent is the thing considered 
" in itself, I will say even so reasonable and 
" praiseworthy." O that the Protestant com- 
munions, who will not own a supreme tribunal 
created by our divine Legislator, would at least 
submit to the authority of superior men of 
disinterested minds ! O that they would be 

D 



34 ANSWER TO THE [part I . 

persuaded by a Grotius ov a Leibnitz ! Their 
schisms at length would cease to divide the 
kingdom of Jesus Christ. Will they ever hud 
safer guides, or judges more unexceptionable 
than these two geniuses ; both nurtured and ren- 
dered illustrious in the bosom of the reformation, 
both surmounting by profound research the pre- 
judices of birth, and the habits of life, and 
consigning, in their immortal testaments, the 
triumph of Catholicity ? # 

1 was far from expecting, from the opinion 
you had 'given me of the author, that I should 
see figuring in the Difficulties of Romanism, the 
apparent contradiction between the Fathers of 
the second council of Nice, and those of Frank- 
fort and Paris. It is painful to have to explain 
again what has been explained so often. O that 
this at least may be for the last time ! No doubt 
you have seen in the commerce of life, friends 
or families who lived in union, disagreeing all at 
once through a mere misunderstanding. Com- 
plaints are made on both sides ; they avoid each 
other and condemn each other. The separation 

* Volum pro pace , and Syslcma Thcolog. productions of the 
two first heads of the reformation. 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 35 

and dissension last as long as the error from 
which they arose. At last comes an explanation i 
the mistake is discovered, and the falsity of the 
reports which had circulated : they regret that 
they ever believed them, acknowledge their 
faults, and on both sides return with pleasure to 
their former sentiments of esteem and concord. 
Now this is precisely the history of the temporary 
misunderstanding on the subject of images, be- 
tween the East and the Gauls, at the time of 
which we are speaking. Alarming reports of 
the sentiments and decisions of Nice give occa- 
sion to the convocation of the council of Frank- 
fort. An unfaithful translation of the Greek 
acts unluckily comes to confirm these reports, 
and leaves no room to doubt that absolute ado- 
ration has been impiously given to images. 
" The question proposed," say the fathers at 
Frankfort, "is that of the recent council of the 
" Greeks for the adoration of images ; in which 
u it is written, that whoever will not render to 
" the images of the saints service and adoration 
" as to the Divine Trinity, shall be considered 
" anathema." Thirty years afterwards the 
council of Paris still attributed the same senti- 



36 ANSWER TO THE [PART I- 

nients to the fathers of Nice, and pronounced 
their condemnation, after the example of Frank- 
fort and the Caroline books, and under the same 
erroneous impression. In course of time the 
truth came to light. Correct versions were 
spread about, the mistake was acknowledged, 
and j ustice was done to the fathers of Nice. 

How indeed could such justice have been re- 
fused, since in the second session the patriarch 
Tarasius was found approving of Pope Adrian's 
letter, and adding, " I am of the same belief, 
" that images are to be adored with a relative 
" affection, reserving to God alone the faith and 
" worship of latria : " and all the council 
loudly proclaiming itself of the same opinion. 
When also in the fifth session this passage came 
from the Bishop of Thessalonica in reply to a 
Pagan : "We do not adore the images, but what 
" they represent • and even then we do not adore 
" them as gods ; God forbid ! but as the servants 
" and friends of God, who pray to Him in our 
" behalf. ' 5 And this passage of a dialogue 
where the Christian replies to a Jew, who is con- 
verted, but scandalized at images : " The scrip- 
" ture forbids us to adore a strange God, and to 



PART I,] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 37 

44 adore an image as God. The linages which 
65 you see among us serve to remind us of the 
44 incarnation of Jesus Christ, by representing 
" his face ; those of the saints represent to us 
44 their combats and their victories. When we 
44 venerate them, we invoke God. Blessed be 
44 thou O God of this saint, and of all the saints." 
Finally, when at the last session, these words 
were read in the decision of the council : 44 To 
images are to be rendered the respect and adora- 
tion of honour ; but not true latria, w hich our 
faith requires, and which belongs solely to the 
Divine nature. But incense and lights are to 
be used before these images, as is customary 
with regard to the cross, and the gospels, all 
after the pious custom of the ancients : for the 
honour paid to the image is referred to the ori- 
ginal ; and he who adores the image, adores the 
44 subject which it represents." These latter 
expressions are cited by Mr. Faber, while he 
suppresses the preceding ones, and takes care 
not to give the passages mentioned above, nor 
the following pronounced by the Bishop of 
Ancyra in the first session : 44 I receive the 
44 venerable images of Jesus Christ inasmuch 



38 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

44 as he became man for our salvation ; those of 
u his holy mother, the angels, the apostles, the 
" martyrs, and all the saints. 1 kiss them, and 
" give them the adoration of honour. I reject 
" with all my heart the false council called the 
" seventh, as contrary to the whole tradition of 
" the Church.^ He himself had subscribed for 
fear of persecution ; but remorse brought him 
with many others to a solemn retractation. 

It is well known that the word adoration was 
in use in the East to signify a simple testimony 
of submission and respect ; whilst in Gaul it was 
used solely to express the homage rendered to 
the Supreme Being. Is it not an absurd injus- 
tice to give it only the latter signification in the 
mouth of the Orientals ? Is it to no purpose 
then that they themselves distinguish two kinds 
of adoration, that of honour, and that of latria ? 
To no purpose that they proclaim that the 
former is for the images of the saints, and the 
latter for God alone ? It is in vain for them to 
declare that the honour and adoration pass from 
the image to the original : they cannot persuade 
certain obstinate and prejudiced minds. These 
will maintain, in spite of their declarations, that 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 39 

the word adore is only susceptible of one signi- 
fication, and that consequently they cannot 
attach to it any other : these will maintain that 
when they pray before an image or picture, 
(for they must know better than the others) 
they only pray to the marble, the wood, or 
the canvass ; that they have no thought be- 
yond these, and consequently that they have 
been, are, and will be for ever idolaters, both 
they and their adherents ! What then is to be 
done ? What course must we take ? Pity these 
peevish and contentious spirits, and leave them 
to themselves. 

To sum ii]) — the Fathers of Nice, those of Paris, 
and those of Frankfort, agreed without being 
aware of it, in the self-same doctrine. The opi- 
nion of the Orientals, falsely interpreted for 
some years, but better understood afterwards, 
was found conformable to that of Gaul, Germany, 
Italy, and ancient tradition : and in the end it 
reigned exclusively in the East, under the rule 
of the Empress Theodora. Here is precisely 
what should be thought of the vicissitudes, occa- 
sioned by the Iconoclast emperors. I am sorry 
for Mr. Faber's sake, after all the pleasure he 



40 ANSWER TO THE [part I 

has felt in enumerating the pretended varia- 
tions of a Church, which believes itself, with 
reason, unchangeable in faith, and which even 
by its Divine constitution, cannot be other- 
wise. 

After attempting to shake our infallible tri- 
bunal by exhibiting councils opposed to each 
other, and completely failing in this first 
attempt ; is it likely that Mr. Faber will be 
more successful in opposing them by turns to 
the primitive Church, and the sacred scriptures ? 
He has persuaded himself that he should triumph 
over the fourth council of Lateran, held in 1215, 
under Innocent III. He takes offence at the 
word transubstantiatio?i, employed in the first 
chapter, to express the change of substance, in 
the Eucharist. He pronounces that the word 
and the thing are in manifest opposition to the 
belief and doctrine of the first five centuries. 
He expresses himself in a decisive and dogma- 
tical tone, like a man sure of what he asserts ; 
and he little suspects that he is all the while 
completely in error. He will see positive proof 
of his being in error in the next chapter. I shall 
there establish the proposition precisely contrary 



PART k] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 41 

to his ; that is to say, the exact conformity of 
the doctrine of the first five centuries with that 
of the fourth council of Lateran. You will, 1 
flatter myself, agree with me, that Mr. Faber 
has not discovered the spirit and doctrine of the 
Fathers upon the Eucharist, that he takes their 
doctrine in an inverted sense ; as do Tillotson 
and all the sacramentarians — whence it follows 
that he thinks them contradictory to each other 
and even to themselves. I will throw new light 
on this subject ; and the result will necessarily 
be, that what he calls my " shrewd arguments," 
furnished in rigorous truth, the only key which 
can lay open the opinion of the fathers, and 
acquit them of the charge of being at variance 
with themselves and one another. 

At present I pass on to the pretended opposi- 
tion of our general councils to the sacred scrip- 
tures. But previous to replying to the examples 
of it which he produces, it will be necessary to 
shew him again, since he does not know it, or 
pretends not to know, by what marks the 
cecumenicity, or universality of councils becomes 
acknowledged, as well as their decisions of doc- 
trine, or other regulations. It is^ strange that 



42 ANSWER TO THE [PART I. 

professing to refute my work step by step, he 
leaves it continually, and flies off, no one knows 
where, to find something to sift and dispute. I 
have undoubtedly a right, when he professes to 
attack me, to require him to do so upon my own 
principles, and not upon those of others. Now 
I have laid down as a fundamental principle, 
with all our able theologians, that the general 
acceptation of the bishops dispersed over the 
world, the judges of faith, could alone make 
known to us whether such a council was really 
oecumenical, or such a decree of a Pope pro- 
nounced ex cathedra ; and consequently whe- 
ther the decision of the council or Pope apper- 
tained to faith. Upon this principle, it is easy 
for you, Sir, to judge, that the whole of what 
Mr. Faber adduces from his second chapter to 
the end of page 17, is entirely foreign, and inap- 
plicable to the Catholic doctrine. He would 
have done very wisely, if he had spared himself 
the trouble of swelling out his book with it, and 
ns the labour of reading articles which do not in 
any way interest us. 

We should be grievously mistaken, if like Mr. 
Faber, we were to take for decisions and articles 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 43 

of faith, all that we found in the decrees, chap- 
ters, or canons of general councils. We often 
find in them sentences introduced to serve for 
explanation, or to prevent a difficulty ; others 
hardly touched upon, and merely given en 
passant, which therefore do not belong to the 
main subject of the decision. These incidental 
sentences do not in any way concern faith, and 
impose no obligation of belief or assent.* If 
you please, we will take as an example one of 
the canons brought as an objection by Mr. Faber, 
page 26 — the sixth canon of the second council of 
Lateran, in the year 1139, that we may discuss 
the second council before the third with the 
Rectors permission, though he takes them the 
other way. " Decernimus ut ii qui in ordine 
" subdiaconatus et supra uxores duxerint, aut 
" concubinas habuerint, officio atque ecclesiastico 
" beneficio careant." This is the whole decree 
of discipline. Let us observe what follows : 
" Cum enim ipsi templum Dei, vasa Domini, 
" sacrarium Spiritus Sancti debeant esse et dici, 
" indignum est eos cubilibus et immunditiis 

* See Melchior Canus de locis Theol. a celebrated theolo- 
gian of the council of Trent. 



44 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

" deservire." This passage follows the decision, 
and does not belong to it : it is added in the way 
of explanation to justify the prohibition and 
obviate objections. In a word, it is a reflection, 
and not a decree. This, I imagine, should be 
enough to pacify the mind of Mr. Faber, which 
has taken fire at the reflection of the fathers of 
Lateran. Let him then cool down, and not 
imagine that if he became a Catholic, he would 
be obliged to admit as an article of faith, what 
appears to have given him so much offence. 

I do not see however that he ought to feel any 
great difficulty in adopting it, if he reflected 
ever so little. If in the law of Moses, the man 
who had carnally cohabited with his wife was 
considered unclean, and could not on the same 
day even enter the sanctuary, is it not very con- 
gruous that the priest of the new law, obliged 
as he is every day to administer the sacraments 
or celebrate the sacred mysteries, should abso- 
lutely refrain from conjugal obligations ? Let 
the Rector only take a review of the distractions, 
disquietudes, and other consequences entailed 
by the nuptial union ; let him reflect on the first 
bower of mankind, and I cannot think he will 



PART I ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 45 

find any exaggeration in the words employed by 
the council to justify the prohibition of marriage 
for ecclesiastics. Nevertheless, however rigor- 
ous and general it appears, there might be cir- 
cumstances in which, with the hope of promoting 
greater good, the Church might judge it right, 
as at Nice, to leave to priests both the condition 
and use of marriage. For the rest, Mr. Faber is 
wrong in imputing to us the prohibition of mar- 
riage in general. He ought to know that it is 
more honoured by the Catholic Church, than by 
his own. With him, and every other Protestant, 
matrimony is merely a civil ceremony ; with us, 
this civil ceremony is exalted by the sacrament 
of matrimony. 

It is ridiculous to behold, at pp. 27-28, the 
imaginary triumph of the Rector, and to pur- 
sue the pompous chain of syllogisms and dilem- 
mas which he unrols in order to place the 
council in evident contradiction with the scrip- 
ture. When Luther formerly sought to prove 
that good works availed little to salvation, he 
advanced on the authority of St. Paul, that man 
was justified by faith alone. People cried out 
on all sides, that the word alone was not in the 



46 ANSWER TO THE Part i] 

apostle's text. In reality it never was there ; 
but it remains in Luther's quotation to lead 
astray the simple and ignorant who may read it. 
After the example of the veracious patriarch of 
the reformation, Mr. Faber will also quote St. 
Paul, (Heb. xiii. 4) with equal fidelity. " Scrip- 
" ture declares," says he, " that marriage is 
" honourable in all men, whether they be clerks 
" or laics" Would not you suppose, Sir, that 
this text, distinguished by italics and capitals, 
was really St. Paul's ? Divide it in two, how- 
ever, and be so kind as to return the larger half 
to our good Rector. Of the twelve words 
in italics, the seven concluding ones are his own ; 
St. Paul only says, " marriage honourable in 

all Ti^iog o Toi^oq \v Trolcri. 

I understand the text to mean, " let marriage 
" be honourable and not " marriage is honour- 
" able," as Mr. Faber translates it. He will say 
that his English bible translates as he does : let 
it be so ; but then I find two in fault instead of 
one : they are both wrong. In that chapter the 
apostle is giving precepts of morality, and all in 
the imperative mood ; as verse 1st, Let fraternal 
charity, &c. — v, 5, Let your manners, &c. — ver. 7, 



Part i] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 47 

Remember, &c. — v. 9, Be not led away, &c. and 
so on in verses 13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24 ; 
and in the last verse, we have Grace be with you, 
even in your bible, where the Latin is merely, 
Gratia, Dei vobiscum. Therefore the text in 
question ought to be understood, Let marriage 
be honourable in all. What completes the proof 
is, that by translating-, Marriage is honourable 
in all men, the proposition thus put forth in the 
affirmative and general sense, would be untrue : 
for certainly marriage is neither honourable nor 
honoured in those spouses who break their 
mutual engagement. 1 have dwelt a long time 
on the monosyllable is ; but I considered it 
necessary to furnish you with the means of 
judging if Mr. Faber had any right to conclude 
as he does ; " Hence it is evident," — " and hence 
" also it is evident .... by the indisputable fact, 
&,c." Language has nothing stronger, and yet 
more foolishly paraded than the word evident. 
Now judge, if you please, where is the double 
evidence of Mr. Faber, in his critique upon the 
second council of Lateran. I flatter myself 
that, at least in your opinion, certitude is on 
my side. 



48 ANSWER TO THE (part I. 

It appears that my antagonist has a particular 
dislike to all that was formerly transacted in 
the ancient basilic of Lateran, We shall have 
hereafter to defend the fourth council from his 
attacks. Here he falls upon the third ; and in 
what manner do you think ? You will soon 
admire with me the most generous and magna- 
nimous exertions of good faith and zeal for the 
truth. In fact, he lights upon the 16th chapter, 
chooses out and places by itself the following 
passage : " for those are not oaths, but perju- 
" ries, which are made against the utility of 
" the Church, and the institutions of the holy 
u fathers." It is easy to see how this passage, 
thus insulated, will provoke a zealous comment 
from the indignation of the Rector. His tact is 
chiefly conspicuous in his having detached it 
from what preceded and followed it ; and thus 
given it a general and indefinite sense, which is 
far from the intention of the council. 1 must 
give you the whole of the 16th chapter, entitled, 
" Of the regulations of Churches." " Since in 
" all churches, what has been approved by a 
" majority of the ancient brethren should be 
" observed without delay ; those deserve to be 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 49 

" reprimanded, who, few in number, and less 
" influenced by reason than caprice, oppose 
44 what has been decided by the majority, and 
" thus disturb the course of ecclesiastical govern- 
" ment. t herefore we decree by these pre- 
" sents, that except in cases where reason and 
" truth are on the side of the minority, the deter- 
44 initiation of the more numerous and wise por- 
" tion of the chapter shall be put in execution, 
" notwithstanding* any appeal. And let not 
44 this our decision be evaded, even if any one of 
44 the members should maintain that he is obliged 
44 by oath to support such or such custom of his 
44 church. For those are not oaths, but perjuries, 
44 which are made against the utility of the 
44 Church, and the institutions of the holy Fathers. 
44 And if the member persists in despising deci- 
44 sions conformable to reason and holy institu- 
44 tions, let him be subjected to a suitable 
44 penance, and so long deprived of the partici- 
44 pation of the body of our Lord." It is plain 
that this regulation regards the canons of cathe- 
drals, where the capitular statutes are made by 
the majority ; and it supposes a case where the 
wish of the majority is to abolish a custom 

E 



50 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt I. 

become prejudicial. One of the members 
chooses to oppose the measure, under the pre- 
text that he has sworn to observe the usage or 
custom which the majority wish to abolish. — 
44 You swore to keep it," they tell him, 44 when 
u it was in full force ; but now the authority 
44 which established it, is resolved upon its abo- 
44 lition. This at once annuls the obligation of 
44 your former oath. To persist in defending it, 
1,4 would be going against the statutes of our 
44 fathers, and against the utility of the church : 
44 your oath would become a perjury." Nothing 
can be more simple and true than this. 

But how does Mr. Faber proceed ? He picks 
out a sentence to his liking ; he presents it in 
an insulated form ; for cathedral churches he 
substitutes the Catholic church, and puts its 
rulers in place of the canons of chapters. From 
this he sets off heroically to declaim against the 
political and ambitious views of Rome ! You 
will allow, Sir, that his favoured hands do not 
change lead into gold. 

His violent sally against the policy and pro- 
jects of aggrandizement used by the court of 
Rome, is led on by a pompous display upon the 



paiit I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 51 

sacred inviolability of an oath, of whatever kind 
it may be : for he makes no exceptions, not even 
of one made against the interests of an indivi- 
dual, of a family, or against the rules of society. 
If he does not go thus far, he argues away from 
the question, and says nothing that will avail ; 
since the council only declares those oaths to be 
perjuries, which are made against the utility of 
the churches and the statutes of the holy fathers. 

Little would the reader here expect to see poor 
John Huss brought on the stage. The Rector, 
after his ingenious comment on the 16th chapter, 
brings forth the faggot of this unfortunate man, 
as a consequence of the doctrine which he pre- 
tends to have there discovered. According: to 
his account, the Emperor had sworn to preserve 
the life of John Huss ; but this oath, being con- 
sidered contrary to the interests of the Church, 
was annulled, he says, by the fathers of Con- 
stance. W ell, Sir, would you wish to know the 
truth of this affair ? Sigismund had taken no 
oath at all ; and consequently the council did 
not annul any. The Emperor had directed a 
safe-conduct to be given to John Huss, who 
wished to defend his doctrine at Constance. 



52 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

There his doctrine was condemned ; and the 
man declared a heretic for his obstinacy in not 
renouncing his errors. The law, unhappily in 
force on the Continent at that time, as well as 
in England, was put in execution against him. 
Sigismund was so far from having sworn to 
preserve his life, that he declared in the council 
itself that if Huss did not retract, he himself 
would be the first to set fire to his pile. # I must 
say, that if it be disgraceful in a controvertist to 
repeat an objection, a hundred times solidly re- 
futed, it is fatiguing to me to have again to 
write its refutation as if it were for the first time. 

How unpleasant and painful indeed is the task 
to have again to expose the false exhibition 
which Mr. Faber makes o£ the 27th chapter of 
the same council. Where are we henceforth to 
look for equity and good faith, if they are no 
longer in the mouth, and under the pen of a 
clergyman ? The Rector has the effrontery to 
advance, that by this 27th canon the obligation 

* The Protesant historian of the council of Constance in- 
forms us that John Huss, and Jerome of Prague, were delivered 
up to the flames by order of Sigismund himself. — L 1 Enfant ^ 

book 3, § 48. 



Part i] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 53 

of destroying heretics was imposed upon the 
faithful, who are bound, as he would have it, 
even in these days either to fulfil this obligation, 
or to reject the infallibility of the Church. And 
yet he cannot be ignorant of the difference w hich 
we make between dogmatical decisions which 
command the faith of Christians for ever, and 
ordinances of discipline which change with the 
circumstances which gave them birth. The 
Rector could not have been ignorant that at the 
period, of which he speaks, the two powers acted 
in concert ; and that the council did no more 
than support the temporal authorities, by press- 
ing the people at their recommendation to march 
against certain barbarous and formidable sects. 
He must have known that the council, so far 
from ordering the destruction of heretics in 
general, marks out most distinctly those of 
whom it has been informed, and distinguishes 
by name the Albigenses, Bulgarians, Cathari, 
Publicani, sprung from the Eastern Manicheans, 
and the excesses and ravages committed by 
them in Italy, throughout the South of France, 
and even in Spain. " They exercise/' says the 
council in the same 27th canon, " such cruelty 



54 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

u upon the Christians, that without regard to 
" churches or monasteries, they spare neither 
" widows, orphans, old men, or children, age or 
44 sex ; but destroy and lay waste all before 
44 them, like the Pagans." In fine, Mr. Faber 
must have been aware that against every other 
kind of heretics the Church has never known, 
and never will know any other arms than per- 
suasion and praj er. 

In truth, Sir, I cannot forget the assurance 
with which Mr. Faber takes to himself the praise 
of having supported upon facts his arguments 
against the infallibility of the Church. Unques- 
tionably his 44 naked facts," as he calls them, 
have all their merit intrinsically in themselves ; 
they have nothing to do with extraneous orna- 
ments. Nevertheless their nudity has need of 
some covering, and this indispensable covering- 
is truth. You have seen that truth is essentially 
wanting to what he has with a semblance of 
candour presented you as 44 naked facts." You 
have seen the arguments which he has professed 
to deduce from them, disappear along with them 
upon the slightest examination. Really if I 
were a member of your churchy I am sorry to 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 55 

say that I should feel obliged to petition for mi 
injunction to forbid any apologist to under- 
take her defence with such weapons : for it is 
manifesting to the world that there are no solid 
arms to be found for your cause. 

Reading at page 31 these words of Mr. 
Faber : — " The Bishop lastly argues, &c." 1 
expected that the Rector was about to mention 
and refute my final proofs of the infallibility. 
Not at all : he says nothing about them ; he 
conceals them from his readers, and gives instead 
of them, arguments drawn from I know not 
where. This leads me to make an observation, 
which is but too applicable elsewhere. When he 
chooses to sum up in a few lines, whole pages of 
my w ork, — my ideas, w ords, and proofs are com- 
pletely metamorphosed beneath his pen : — I no 
longer recognize myself; it is not me, but 
some other whom he appears to attack. This 
obliges me to beg of my readers to do me the 
justice to confront my text with what he im- 
putes to me. I particularly request them in 
this place to compare my third letter with his 
second chapter. They will then be convinced 



56 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

that instead of producing my proofs, he sup- 
presses the most striking- among them, and im- 
putes to me what are not mine. I can solemnly 
declare, that if the reader only knows my work 
by the Difficulties of Romanism, he will have 
but an incomplete and often false idea of the 
Discussion Amicaie. 

In every question treated in that work, the 
plan which I have constantly followed, has been 
to prove our doctrine by the holy scriptures, 
and by the traditions of the primitive Church ; 
as these two principles are generally admitted 
and acknowledged by Protestant theologians. 
I cannot answer for their being so by Mr. Faber ; 
for on the subject of tradition, he appears hardly 
to know what to hold. Sometimes he seems 
sufficiently disposed to admit it, and sometimes 
to reject it altogether. At page viii. of his 
preface, he requires us to produce from period 
to period, an uninterrupted chain of witnesses 
up to the apostles themselves : in other places 
he persuades himself that he can shew us to be 
in opposition to the primitive Church, by some 
passages detached from the third or the second 
century. At page 33, he tells us, that if the 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 57 

Christians of the second century could easily 
join those of the first ; we can no longer do the 
same, separated as we are from the apostles* time 
by too great a distance, to pass safely over the 
space of eighteen centuries, and join the last link 
of the chain to the first. But from page 71 to 
18, he quotes against us several passages from 
Fathers, of whom St. Clement of Alexandria, is 
the most ancient. At page 35, he will admit no 
doctrine which is not clearly founded on the holy 
scripture ; and at page 49, he maintains that the 
precept of St. Paul, " Hold the traditions which 
" you have learned, whether by word or by our 
epistle," * was not binding except about the 
period when he inculcated it to the Thessalo- 
nians. But at page 18, he labours hard to prove, 
that the first five centuries are against transub- 
stantiation. At page 32, he approves of the 
argument of prescription of Tertullian and St. 
Irenseus, which we still use to shew the aposto- 
licity of any dogma or custom. 

Among the doubts and variations of Mr. Faber, 
he will not object to my adopting that as his 
opinion which is the most favourable to tradi- 
* Thess. ii. v. 14. 



58 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part 



tion. I am the more inclined to do this, as it 
will be the means of reconciling his sentiments 
with those of the most celebrated Theologians of 
of his church, who profess an entire deference 
for the fathers, and councils of the first five 
centuries,* and with the great lights, the learned 

* £ * Let us stand to the judgment and decision of antiquity, 
" and embrace that saying of the Nicene Fathers, as if it came 
" from an oracle, let the ancient customs be observed." — 
Bp. Montague Pre/, to App. ad orig. Ecctes. 

" Whilst men do labour to bring into discredit the ancient 
" Fathers and primitive Churches, they derogate from them- 
" selves such credit as they hunt after, and as much as in tnem 
" lieth, bring many parts of religion into wonderful uncertainty." 
Up. Overalls Convocation Book, p. 191. 

u Although scripture is the most certain and safe rule of 
" belief, yet there being no less veracity in the tongues than in 
u the hands, in the preachings than the writings of the apostles ; 
" nay prior sermo quani liber, prior sensus quam stylus, saith 
" Tertullian, the apostles preached before they writ, planted 
" Churches before they addressed epistles to them ; on these 
" grounds I make no scruple to grant that apostolical traditions, 
" such as are truly so, as well as apostolic writings, are equally 
" the matter of that Christian's belief, who is equally secured by 
" the fidelity of the conveyance, that as one is apostolical 
"writing, so the other is apostolical tradition." — Dr. Ham- 
mond's Disc, of Heresy. 

" If any other matters not yet received or practised in our 
« Church, should be found to be of equal antiquity and univer- 
" sality, I declare it to be my hearty desire that they also may 
e< be restored : for I am well assured, that from the beginning 
" of the gospel of Christ to the time of the council of Nice, and 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



59 



personages of that admirable and pious epoch. 
I have quoted many testimonies from them in 
the fourth letter of the Discussion Amicale. 

" long after, during the fourth century, the Catholic Church 
" all over the world was united in one holy doctrine, discipline, 
" and manner of worship." — Dr. BretVs Introduction to his 
Independency of the Church, p. 7. 

" During the first five centuries, the Church then pure and 
" flourishing, taught unmixed the faith which the apostles had 
" preached." — Whitaker on Antichrist, p. 51. 

" This general consent of our so profoundly judicious Pro- 
u testants, in appealing unto the primitive Church for the space 
" of the first four hundred and forty years after Christ, thus 
" acknowledged by our adversaries, may well serve for a just 
" reproof of their slander, who usually upbraid Protestants with 
" contempt of all antiquity : for here even old Rome is com- 

" mended Protestants are so far from suffering the 

" limitation of the first 410 years, that they give the Romanists 
66 the scope of the first 500 or 600 years, as our adversaries 
" themselves do acknowledge." — Morton's Catholic Appealefor 
Protestants. Edit. London, 1610, book 4, chap. 30, page 
573. 

" It cannot be doubted," says the learned Usher, " that 
" St. Patrick had a peculiar veneration for the church of Rome, 
" whence he had been sent to labour in the conversion of our 
u island; and I myself had I lived at that time, should have 
" submitted as willingly to the judgment of that church, as to 
" that of any other in the world : so sacred is the esteem which 
" I cherish for the integrity of that church in those happy 
u days." (At the end of Usher's Religion of the Irish, p. 87, 
of the 5th century — epoch of St. Patrick.) 

These will suffice : but you may find thirty other authorities 
in IVix's Reflections, Id edition, London, 1819. 



60 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part i. 



There you may see, my dear Sir, several pas- 
sages to which it would have been easy to add 
a hundred more, from St. Augustine, St. Vin- 
cent of Lerins, the 318 bishops of the great 
council of Nice, St. Chrysostom, St. Epiphanius, 
St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Ire- 
nseus,all decisive upon the authority of tradition. 

Let us stop at the second century ; and shew 
by contemporary writers, that the doctrine and 
practice of the Church at that period were the 
same as those of the first century.* St. Cle- 

* It would be ea«y to prove from your best divines that the 
doctrine of the apostles was taught in its integrity down to 
the 5th century inclusively. Besides the passages of Usher, 
Morton, and Whitaker just quoted, I could cite many others 
produced by Mr. Wix. The common opinion of your able 
Theologians is, that the first four general councils ought to be 
received, and the doctrine of the same space of time considered 
as apostolical. This observation overturns the first principle 
laid down by Mr. Faber in his preface, where he requires in 
proof of apostolicity, a chain of witnesses uninterrupted up to 
the apostles themselves. I could oblige him, by the superior 
authority of his own masters in theology, from the first apologist 
of your reformation Jewel, down to the doctors of our own 
times, to admit as apostolical the doctrine of the 3d, 4th, and 
5th centuries. But I will not rigorously assert my rights, and 
he ought to thank me for my forbearance. I attach myself to 
one of his opinions, page 32, w here he acknowledges that the 
doctrine of the second century was truly that of the apostjes : 
let us be satisfied w ith this, and endeavour to make him also 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 61 

ment of Alexandria, testifies that " Some of 
" those who had immediately succeeded the 
" apostles, and preserved the tradition of their 
44 doctrine, had lived even to his time, in order 
44 to scatter and cultivate the seed of the true 
44 faith." What St. Clement testified with re- 
gard to Egypt, analogy allows us to suppose 
for several other churches ; such for instance as 
that of Smyrna, whose bishop, St. Polycarp, 
martyred at the age of a hundred, in 166, had 
actually been a disciple of St. John. 44 God," as 
I observed in the Discussion Amicale, v.l. p. 194, 
44 in his designs of protection for his Church, 
44 permitted that in the midst of persecutions 
44 and dangers, some few of these primitive and 
44 holy bishops should have their career pro- 
44 tracted to a very advanced age ; and as here- 
44 tofore in the beginning of the world, the 
44 patriarchs by means of their long lives, trans- 
44 mitted more easily to posterity what they had 

satisfied. Among the witnesses of the 2d century, I reckon 
St. Cyprian, born about the year 190, converted by the aged 
Cecilius — Origeii, born about 165 — Tertullian, born about 
160 — St. Clement of Alexandria, about 151 — St. Irenaeus, 
about 120 — Theophilus of Antioch, abont 115 — St: Justin in 
the year 103. 



62 ANSWER TO THE Part i] 

" learnt from their fathers of the creation of the 
" world, the dogmas of religion, and the princi- 
" pal traits of the antediluvian history, so in 
44 the Christian dispensation, these venerable old 
44 men served to bear witness that their faith was 
44 exactly the same which they had received from 
44 the apostles or their immediate disciples." 
Tertullian informs us by what means the doc- 
trine of the apostles was preserved in the vari- 
ous churches. I cannot help placing before you 
a very curious passage on this subject. 44 Accord- 
44 ing to the order prescribed for all the churches, 
44 councils are assembled in certain parts of 
44 Greece, where the most important affairs are 
44 discussed in common ; and this representation 
44 of the whole Christain name obtains among us 
44 the greatest veneration/ 5 * From this institu- 
tion resulted that kind of consanguinity in doc- 
trine, which existed, as he says in his usual 
energetic manner, among all the churches of the 
Christian world Does he not likewise refer 
those who wished to know the tradition of the 

* Treatise on Fasting, ch. 13. To these councils here 
spoken of by Tertullian, our learned Usher refers with equal 
sagacity and justice the most ancient apostolic canons. See 
what he says of them in Cotelier, No. 8, T. 1, p. 430. 



Part I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 63 

apostles, to the churches founded by them, such as 
Corinth, Ephesus, &c. See, he adds, what Rome 
has learnt, u what she teaches, and the perfect 
" harmony between her doctrine, and that of 
" the churches of Africa." " ft is asked/' says 
he in another place, " whether no tradition is 
" to be admitted but what is written" — this is 
precisely the idea sometimes affected by Mr. 
Faber ; and here follows its refutation — " To 
44 begin with baptism ; when we go down into 
44 the water, we protest in the church and under 
44 the hand of the bishop, that we renounce 
44 Satan, his pomps and his angels : then we are 
44 plunged three times, answering something 
44 more than our Saviour prescribed in the gospel. 
44 When we come out of the water, we taste a 
44 mixture of milk and honey ; and from that 
44 time we abstain for a week from our daily 
44 bath. The sacrament of the Eucharist, or- 
44 dained by our Saviour at supper, and for all, 
44 we take in our assemblies before day-light, 
44 and only from the hand of him who officiates ; 
44 we offer for the dead ; we celebrate annually 
44 the nativities of the martyrs. You ask me 
44 some law of the scriptures for these usages and 



64 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part 



" others like them ; you will find no such law. 
" But we produce you tradition which adds 
" them, custom which confirms them, and faith 
" which practices them."* 

No doubt Te i t ullian extolled with reason the 
faith of the churches founded by the Apostles, 
when he directed persons desirous of knowing 
what doctrine had been revealed, to such of the 
churches as were nearest to him. But St. Ire- 
neeus, before him, had rendered the most glo- 
rious homage to the see of St. Peter, eminent 
above all others, when he declared j* " that all 
" the churches in the world should be in £ood 
" understanding and accordance with that of 
" Rome, where the tradition derived from the 
" Apostles is preserved in its integrity." Thus 
the particular councils which, according to the 
fiijst quotation from Tertullian, were held in 
Greece, according to the rule established from the 
time of the apostles, and the teaching of the 
Roman church, the centre of all churches, 
according to St. Ireneeus, were the powerful 

* Lib. de Corona, n. 3, 4. 
+ Lib. 3, contra Haeres, ch. 3. 



PART l] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. (J5 

motives which preserved all the faithful in unity 
of faith and episcopal government. 

1 will conclude this digression on the second 
century by Hegesippus, who in his old age 
wrote at Rome, in 176, under Pope Eleutherius. 
That Pope succeeded Soter, and Hegesippus had 
seen him the deacon of Anicetus. Hegesippus 
had travelled from Jerusalem into Greece and 
the islands, had conversed with a great number 
of bishops, and testifies in a fragment preserved 
by Eusebius, ( Hist. Eccl. lib. 4 y J " that in 
44 every church was held the self-same doctrine, 
44 which is contained in the law, in the prophets, 
44 and in the preaching of our Saviour." 

Although Mr. Faber, p. 32, acknowledges the 
doctrine of the second century to be apostolical, 
I have thought myself bound to place again 
before you decisive proofs and undeniable testi- 
monies of it. 1 have thought it the more neces- 
sary to hx your ideas and confirm them upon 
this important point, as those of the Rector are 
wavering ; and if he appears, at p. 32, to admit 
the authority of the second century, he seems 
elsewhere to reject altogether the tradition of 
the primitive Church. Without looking farther 



66 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX 

than page 35, he will hear nothing of decisions, 
either of Rome or of any other councils. He 
will have the Holy Scriptures to be the sole 
judge of controversies. — - 44 As no one pretends," 
says he, " that we possess any other written, 
'* and therefore any other certain revelation, we 
44 must evidently begin with rejecting every 
44 doctrine and every practice built upon such 
44 doctrine, which have clearly no foundation in 
44 Holy Scripture*" Thus apostolical tradition 
in this place goes for nothing : but to whom 
does it belong to interpret the Holy Scripture ? 
Is it to be delivered up to private judgment, to 
the insulated opinion of each individual ? This 
was Luther's resolution : he proclaimed for all, 
the liberty which he had claimed for himself. 
Without such liberty indeed his reformation 
would never have advanced a step. But he was 
not long without tasting the bitter fruits which 
it brought him. He thundered and blushed at 
the divisions among his followers ; but did 
not put a stop to them. They have never 
ceased to succeed one another, and tear Pro- 
testantism to pieces. All have sprung from 
the same principle, and keep continually issuing 



1 J ART I.J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 07 

from it, like mushrooms from the earth, as Mr. 
Faber himself expresses it. In a word, this 
principle, which gave life and increase to the 
reformation, has progressively brought on its 
decline, and will infallibly cause its death. 
Mr. Faber sees it, and curses its fatal and ine- 
vitable effects: let us mark well this acknow- 
ledgment. Would to Heaven that his brethren 
and superiors would lift up their voices with 
him to sound the same warning throughout 
England ! But when a principle is acknow- 
ledged to be thus monstrously abusive, it is not 
enough to deplore it ; they should have courage 
enough to renounce its consequences. The first 
of these, not to mention others in this place, was 
schism. Let then the Established Church return 
without delay to unity. This must be ; or the 
sects she has produced will soon be the death of 
their mother. 

Mr. Faber assures us that the principle of 
private judgment was not that of Parker and 
his colleagues. How then did they raise them- 
selves to the head of the ecclesiastical govern- 
ment ? Was it not in opposition to the disci- 
pline universally established ; in opposition to 

f 2 



68 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

their spiritual superiors, and in open revolt 
against them, and the canons of the church ? 
It was then by exalting their private opinions 
above the doctrine universally received. The 
Rector calls those reformers wise and venerable, 
whom he beholds nevertheless enthroned in sees 
which were not vacant, but occupied by a right, 
which violence could neither give nor take away, 
by bishops who sacrificed their temporal in- 
terests to the duties of conscience, and the divine 
and ecclesiastical laws of episcopal government. 
Mr. Faber is in admiration at the conduct of 
these intruders, p. 40 — he proposes it as a model 
in preference to the decrees of general councils.* 
A miserable and anticanonical convocation of 
certain minds groveling before the temporal 
power, and in rebellion against the Church con- 
stitutes an authority with him ; and all the 
bishops of the Catholic Church in his eyes possess 
none ! Can you conceive, Sir, a blindness, a 
delirium equal to this ? Can the perversion of 
reason go farther ? How strong then must be 

* " Nothing ought to be more venerable upon earth than 
" the decision of a true oecumenical council." — Leibnitz^ Letter 
to the Duchess of Brunswick^ July % 1694. 



PART I.J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 69 

the power of early education, of self-love, party 
spirit and prejudice, even in minds of superior 
cultivation ! But O God 1 what will those 
ministers answer at thy tribunal on a future 
day, who have led their people astray by such 
instructions ! 

However, let us see what these " wise and 
" venerable reformers," these great models of 
Mr. Faber's, did at their convocation in 1562. 
According to him, when the Holy Scriptures did 
not give them sufficient light, they had recourse 
to the primitive church. I know perfectly well 
that they did no such thing ; but let the Rector's 
assertion pass : and since he recommends the 
imitation of this pretended example, here we 
are once more led back by himself to the primi- 
tive church. Now at least let us endeavour to 
keep him to it. After the repugnance he has 
but too often manifested towards it, he seems 
now to return to it in good earnest, against his 
will it would appear, but carried on by a force 
which is irresistible. At page 4*2 he mentions 
among the doctors of the primitive church, 
Justin, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen 
and Cyprian; and adds as follows; "The 



70 ANSWER TO THE [part i. 

" several writers here enumerated, though but 
" few out of many, form a chain which reaches 
" up to St. John and the apostles. Hence, if we 
w can be morally certain of any thing, we may 
" be sure, that, in their exposition of scripture, 
" so far as the great leading doctrines of Chris- 
" tianity are concerned, they would proceed, 
44 either on direct apostolic authority, or at least 
44 according to the then universally known 
" analogy of apostolic faith." And further on, 
he says, 44 Where in her yet existing documents, 
" the primitive church is explicit, we must, so 
44 far as I can judge, on the principles of right 
44 reason, submit ourselves to her decision." 

Then it is proved, agreed, and decided between 
us that the doctrine of the second century was 
conformable to that of the first, and is known 
to us by the writings of St. Cyprian, Origen, 
Tertullian, St. Clement of Alexandria, St. 
Irenseus and St. Justin. This is amply sufficient, 
Sir, to enable you to pronounce with safety upon 
the questions between us. For if you will be 
at the pains of looking once more into my 
Discussion Amicale, you will see that the tra- 
ditionary proofs of dogmas and practices which 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 71 

I defend, reach up at least to the second cen- 
tury, by means of one or other of the very wri- 
ters whom the Rector has just selected, and 
whom 1 regard as well as himself as undeniable 
witnesses of all that was believed and practised 
in their times. From this you will conclude, 
that if he had reasoned consistently with him- 
self, he would have found himself obliged to 
agree with my book ; since he acknowledges that 
every doctrine or practice which ascends to the 
second century, without any known origin pos- 
terior to that period, must be apostolical. 

But pray explain to me, my dear Sir, what 
Mr. Faber means, for I cannot understand him, 
when he pretends that the proof of tradition, 
" as employed by the Bishop of Aire is a mere 
* fallacy, the detection of which is not very 
" difficult" — page 33 — and when he supposes 
that " I would carry the chain down to the pre- 
" sent time," through a space of nineteen cen- 
turies : page 45. I confess that he is here quite 
incomprehensible. Nothing can be more simple 
than my reasoning, which is absolutely the same 
is his own, and that of every man of sense. In 
fact what have I to prove ? The conformity of 



72 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

any given doctrine with that of the primitive 
church ; for instance, praying for the dead, con- 
fession, satisfaction, or the sign of the cross. 
Well, Sir, am 1 to lose my time in extracting and 
accumulating testimony upon testimony, from 
age to age, from our own up to the apostles ? 
Certainly I shall do no such thing ; and for two 
reasons: 1st, because the belief of the last four- 
teen and fifteen centuries is not disputed, but 
rather accused of novelty and corruption. 2dly, 
because my proofs do not derive force from the 
intermediate generations, but powerfully from 
the primitive ages. My belief ought to be 
founded upon that of the apostolic times ; and 
the certainty that they could not have been 
deceived is also my security. Leaving therefore 
what is not disputed, I proceed straight to the 
fifth century, and by the fathers who attest 
the doctrine of their time, I prove that such an 
article was then taught and believed. In the 
same manner I pass to the fourth century, which 
abounds like the fifth with ecclesiastical docu- 
ments. Following the same method, I arrive at 
the third century, and take advantage of similar 
authorities which I find there, and which, though 



part I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 73 

less numerous, are sufficiently so for my pur- 
pose. Thus 1 come to St. Cyprian, Origen, 
Tertullian, St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Ire- 
na?us, St. Theophilus of Antioch and St. Justin ; 
and supported by these eminent personages, I 
enter triumphantly the second century, and 
repose at length with the Rector at the fountain 
of pure and apostolic doctrine. What can he 
discover in such a progress, which is unfair and 
fallacious ?* If in my Discussion Amicale I 
have often quoted testimonies from the fifth, 
fourth, and third centuries, it was because I was 
reasoning at the time with able theologians of 
your communion, who comprise the first five 
centuries in the primitive church. The Rector 
of Long Newton has chosen to mutilate and 
confine it by his own private authority to the 
second century. I now accommodate myself 
with as good grace as possible to this new fancy 
of the Rector's, though I see what has led him to 
it very clearly. He was no doubt sharp-sighted 

* " f n this manner we can reason even at this day ; and 
" can thereby make Irenaeus' and Tertullian's argument our 
" own, provided we have first proved that the faith we contend 
for is the very same that obtained in the churches of that age." 
(Valei land on Holy Trin. p. 380. 



74 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

enough to perceive, and I confess such percep- 
tion was just — that he would be more violently 
overthrown by the whelming force of the autho- 
rities which would crowd upon him from the 
centuries he has lopped off, in favour of the 
Catholic faith and in opposition to his own 
opinions. 

This brings us to the third chapter ; in which 
Mr. Faber proposes to answer two of my letters, 
and after all answers neither. He gives a sum- 
mary of certain arguments which he supposes 
to be mine, but which are foreign to my mean- 
ing. If I sought to exhibit all his deficiencies in 
this chapter, it would be necessary to consume a 
hundred pages to expose the five of which it 
consists. I will confine myself to the defence of 
what I wrote upon the sixth article of the convo- 
cation of 1562. He takes up its cause ; and for- 
getting once more that he has just acknowledged 
the authority of apostolical tradition, at least to 
the end of the second century, he maintains here, 
with those whom he styles his profound and 
wise reformers, that the Holy Scripture contains 
all that is essential to salvation. If this be so — 
since I am compelled to use repetitions — what 



PART I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 75 

becomes of the necessity of baptism for infants, 
and the sanctifi cation of Sunday ? The Scripture 
says nothing' about either ; and yet the Rector 
admits both equally with ourselves. What be- 
comes even of the authenticity of Scripture ? 
For this can only be proved by the testimony of 
the primitive Church ; and you will soon see the 
Rector compelled, in spite of himself, to own it ; 
thus in the same page he admits tradition, and 
rejects it in favour of the sixth article of his pro- 
found and wise reformers. 

It is the misfortune of those who take up a 
false position, to find themselves unavoidably 
assailed on all sides by difficulties. Tradition 
presented inextricable difficulties to the chief 
reformers ; they exclaimed, " Away with tradi- 
tion ! The Bible, the Bible alone !" and drew 
up their sixth article. They did not see, and 
the Rector who defends them does not see, that 
new and insoluble objections are the only 
result. In fact they there lay down as a fun- 
damental principle, that the Scriptures contain 
all that is necessary for salvation. This princi- 
ple, unless they drew it gratuitously from their 
own heads, ought to have been derived from the 



76 ANSWER TO THE Part i] 

Scripture. If so, let the Rector prove it to us : 
let him produce one single text, where any one 
of the inspired writers teaches that we may con- 
fine ourselves both for faith and practice to what 
is written ; one solitary place, where he declares 
that the Scripture delivers all that the apostles 
taught ; or if you will, all that is essential to 
salvation. But where will he meet with such a 
passage, since we find one absolutely contrary, 
word for word. 44 Stand fast ; and hold the tra- 
44 ditions which you have learned, whether by 
44 word or by our epistle." 2 Thess. ii. v. 14. 
You see the apostle distinguishes his verbal, 
from his epistolary instructions : he prescribes 
to the Thessalonians to keep both equally ; to 
observe the doctrines which he had given them 
in words, and those which he had delivered in 
writing. 

The Rector replies that this held good at the 
time ; for 44 when that epistle was written, most 
44 certainly not all the four gospels had been 

44 published It is no very chimerical sup- 

44 position, that the matters, verbally delivered 
44 by St. Paul, were afterward, in the course of 
44 God's providence, committed to faithful wri- 



Part I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 77 

" ting. Whence it would follow, that the posi- 
44 tion contained in the sixth article of the An- 
44 glican church, though not strictly true when 
44 the apostle wrote his second letter to the Thes- 
44 salonians, may yet in the sixteenth century 
44 have been an incontrovertible verity This 
subterfuge is not without subtilty, and even ad- 
dress, if you would so have it.* It is only a pity 
that it wants solidity : it betrays the Rector's 
embarrassment, and but helps him a little out 
of it, to throw him into contradiction with the 
Fathers, with the best theologians of his own 
church, and even with himself. 

The holy Fathers had the New Testament in 
their hands as well as ourselves ; and yet they 
did not cease to insist on the necessity of admit- 
ting the apostolical traditions, and to establish 
the obligation of so doing upon this very passage 
of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. St. Chry- 
sostoin comments upon it thus : 44 We see by 
44 this that the apostles did not write every 

* It is borrowed from Stillingfleet's Scripture and Tradition 
Compared; from Dr. Patrick, Bishop of Ely, Discourse on Tra- 
dition ; and from Dr. Williams, Bishop of Chichester, Exam, 
of Texts, Sfc. — See Preservative against Popery^voX. 1, Edit. 
London, in folio — 1738. 



78 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX f . 

" thing ; but taught many things by word of 
" mouth only. By whatever way they come to 
" us from them, we are equally obliged to be- 
" lieve them. Let us believe the tradition of 
" the Church ; it ought to be enough to move us 
44 to believe — to know that it is a tradition."* 
" I should consume the whole day," says St. 
Basil, 44 were 1 to recount to you all the mys- 
44 teries transmitted to the Church without the 

44 Scripture Among the dogmas of the 

44 church, there are some contained in the Scrip- 
44 tures, and others come from tradition ; and 
44 both have equal force with regard to our pious 
" veneration. For it would be mortally wound- 
44 ing the gospel to regard traditions as things 
44 of little authority .f y Yet this Mr. Faber does ; 
according to St. Basil, he mortally wounds the 
gospel, by rejecting all that is not written. 
44 We do not find all in the Scripture," says St. 
Epiphanius, 44 because the apostles who have left 
44 us many things in writing, have also left us 

* St. Chrysost. Serm. on the 2d Ep. to the Thess. ch, 2. 

f On the Holy Spirit, ch. 27, on the same passage of St. 
Paul. 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 79 

" others by tradition."* St. Epiphanius then 
was far from teaching that all verbal instruc- 
tions were finally recorded in the New Testa- 
ment ; and among others, those which were to 
be observed according to the precept of St. 
Paul. Call to mind in this place, Sir, the most 
illustrious example of antiquity, that of the 
council of Nice. Eusebius, who had been a 
member of it, testifies " that the bishops op- 
" posed the false subtilties of the Arians by 
" the grand truths of the Scriptures, and the 
" ancient belief of the Church, from the Apostles 
" to that time" And Gelasius informs us that 
" after having a long time, maturely and fully 
" considered this adorable subject — the divinity 
" of Christ — it appeared to all ours at once that 
u the consubstantiality of the Word ought to be 
" defined as of faith, in the same manner as this 
" faith had been transmitted to us by our holy 
" Fathers after the Apostles. 

The Rector and his sixth article are no better 
in accord with your learned theologians, than 

* Ileres. 75, where you see verbal traditions distinguished 
from written traditions, long after the publication of the New 
Testament. 



80 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

with the 318 bishops of the council of Nice. 
" He that will not submit to the concurrent 
" evidence of the ancient liturgies, Fathers, and 
" councils, may bring into controversy, not to 

mentior other things received by the church in 
" all ages, the divine authority of the inspired 
" writings, infant baptism, episcopacy, the 
" Lord's day, and even the divinity of our Lord 
" and Saviour Jesus Christ ; and so at once blow 
" up the Catholic faith and church."* 

" In ecclesiastical history, and there only, 1 
" may say, is the decision of all controverted 
" points in divinity, either as to doctrine or dis- 
" cipline. For every one of them must be de- 
" termined by matter of fact. It is not refining, 
" and criticisms, and our notions of things, but 
" what that faith was which at the first was 
" delivered to the saints. This is matter of fact, 
" and must be determined by evidence. And 
" where any text of the New Testament is dis- 
" puted, the best evidence is from those Fathers 
" of the church, who lived in the apostolic 
" age, and learned the faith from the mouths of 
" the apostles themselves, such as St. Clement, 

* Dr. Hicks on the Christian Priesthood, ml. I, p. 145. 



part l ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 8] 

64 Ignatius, Poiycarp, &c. These must best know 
44 the sense and meaning of the words delivered 
44 by the apostles. And next to them, they to 
44 whom they did deliver the same, and so on 
44 through the several ages of the church to this 
44 day. And those doctrines and that govern- 
" ment of the church, which has this evidence, 
44 must be the truth. And they who refuse to 
44 be determined by this rule, are justly to be 
suspected, nay, they give evidence against 
44 themselves, that they are departed from the 
44 truth."* 44 Those who admit the canon of 
44 Scripture upon the testimony of the Fathers, 
44 will find themselves hard put to it for a reason 
44 why they reject the very same testimony in the 
44 case of church government. For to admit 
44 their testimony in one case, and to reject it in 
" another equally clear and universal, is to play 
44 fast and loose, and to act upon no principles 
44 at all."f " As to the matter in hand, the 
44 defender's persuasion is this: 1. Where there 
44 is any plain opposition between Scripture and 

* Mr. Leslie Dis. concern. Eccl. Hist. p. 2 and 3. 
t Mr. Reeve's Pre/, concerning the right use of the: Fathers, 
vol. 1, p. 16. 

G 



82 ANSWER TO THE [PART I. 

" tradition — there tlie Scripture must be follow- 
" ed. 2. That no such plain contradiction is to 
" be found, where tradition appears early and 
" general. 3. That tradition is necessary to ex- 
" plain some passages of Scripture, where the sense 
" is not clear and indisputable, (and what is there 
" that men will not dispute ?) and that without 
" this supplemental assistance, neither the neces- 
" sity of infant baptism, nor the obligation to 
" keep Sunday, can be made out. 4. That 
" without tradition we cannot prove the Old 
a and New Testament, the word of God," &c * 
" The admitting such a secondary proof (tradi- 
" tion) in this case, is not derogating from Scrip- 
" ture authority, but is confirming and strength- 
" ening it in more views than one/'f " There 
" would scarcely be the smallest doubt that this 
" doctrine on the sacrifice of the Scripture came 
" down from the apostles, and that conse- 
" quently it was necessary to hold to it, even 
" though we should find not a word for it in the 
" writings of the prophets and apostles ; for the 
" precept of St. Paul is universal — My brethren 

* Collier's Vindication, parti, p. 2 and 3. 
+ Water land on the H. Trinity, p. 401. 



Part I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. H'3 

" stand linn, and hold fast t^e traditions which 
44 you have learned, whether by word of month 
44 or by our epistles."* 

I am happy in being able to quote to the Rec- 
tor of Long- Newton, the very doctor from whom 
he has borrowed what 1 have called a subterfuge. 
You shall hear, then, Dr. Patrick, Bishop of Ely. 
The following is from his discourse on tradition : 
" By the consent of all Christians, all that comes 
44 to us from Jesus Christ, on the part of God his 
" Father, or from the apostles on the part of 
44 Jesus Christ, ought to be received and firmly 
44 retained ; whether written or not, it matters 
44 nothing — it makes no difference, provided w e 
44 are assured that it comes to us from him or 
44 them. For what we read in the Scripture does 
44 not derive its authority from its being written ; 
44 but from its coining to us from God. If Jesus 
44 Christ has spoken a thing, it is enough, we 
44 must submit. But we must know that he has 
44 spoken it. By whatever means he lets us know 
44 that he has spoken it, we adopt it." And at the 
end of the first part of his discourse- 4 4 All that has 
44 been taught us by our Lord or his apostles, we 

* Dr. Grabe on a passage of St. Irenceus, 
G 2 



84 ANSWER TO THE [PART I. 

" receive as the word of God, which appears to 
u us sufficiently declared in the Sacred Scrip- 
44 tures. If, however, it were proved to us with 
" certainty, that they taught us any other arti- 
44 cle, we should equally receive it. Every con- 
44 trover sy would be speedily finished — for we 
44 are ready to adopt it, as soon as it shall be made 
44 known to us. Nay more: we have so much 
44 veneration for the successors of the apostles, 
44 that on every doubtful point, we receive, with- 
44 out further research, what they unanimously 
44 declare ........ in a word, we receive tradi- 

44 tions, not all that are so called, but those which 
44 are proposed with sufficient authority ; and 
44 not all those which it is sought to impose upon. 
44 us, by the sole authority of one particular 
44 church, which arrogates to herself dominion 
44 over all others."* It is easy to see that this 
last stroke is directed against the particular 

* The Translator not having been able to meet with Dr. 
Patrick's work, has contented himself with literally rendering, 
in English, the French version of the Bishop of Strasbourg ; 
not doubting that the meaning of Dr Patrick is conveyed with 
perfect fidelity and accuracy. The same remark will apply to 
a short quotation from Humphrey Ditton, in the first chapter of 
part % of the present work, 



fA-RT Ij DIFFICULTIES OF ROM AM ISM. 85 

church of Rome, " with which nevertheless St. 
" Irenaeus declares, that all others ought to 
*' agree, on account of its acknowledged pre- 
" eminence and authority/' But Rome is not 
concerned here alone ; and Dr. Patrick might 
well have abstained from wrongfully shewing 
hostility and injustice towards her.. He requires, 
foefoi e he considers himself obliged to admit any 
tradition, the proof of its being apostolical ; here 
he is right. And the proof which Tertullian, St. 
Basil, St. Augustin, and St. Vincent of Lerins 
gave to the heretics of their times, we also give 
to our separated brethren in England and else- 
where. When they saw an article of faith, of 
discipline, or practice generally established in the 
Church, they attributed its origin to the teach- 
ing of the apostles ; provided however that no 
more recent beginning of it was kuown. In 
fact, it is impossible to assign any other cause to 
such unanimity, 

Mr, Faber is so good as to make me the fol- 
lowing " large concession" as he terms it. " Let 
" his Lordship prove that the traditions of the 
<c modern Latin Church are the identical verbal 
<4 traditions of St. Paul, and the Anglican 



86 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

" Church, I feel assured, will forthwith receive 
44 them." He must allow me to tell him that 
such a sentence leads me to wish that he pos- 
sessed a fund of sounder theology. First, be- 
cause the present Latin Church does not and 
even cannot admit of any other apostolical tra- 
ditions, than those which were admitted in the 
age of St. Augustin. Secondly, because it is 
not according to right notions of theology to 
distinguish in the preaching of the apostles, the 
teaching of St. Peter, of St. Paul, of St. Matthew, 
or of any others in particular. Let him consult 
his ancient masters ; and he will learn from Dr. 
Stillingfleet among others that " We have all the 
" reason in the world to believe that the apostles 
" delivered one and the same faith to all the 
" churches, having the same infallible spirit to 
" direct them."* This sameness of teaching is 
the source of oral and apostolical traditions ; to 
that must be attributed all that is uniformly 
found in all the Christian liturgies of the fifth 
century, prayer for the dead, confession, satis- 
faction, &c. I have developed the proofs of this 
in my Discussion Amicale. 

* Stilling fieeV 's Sermon on Tradition. 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 87 

Allow me to present you one more quotation 
at the end of those already drawn from your own 
theologians. It may perhaps sting you a little 
to hear the first of your apologists, the cele- 
brated Jewel, thus express himself on the subject 
of tradition. " Although we have departed from 
" that Church, which they call Catholic ; .... it 
" is sufficient for us that we have departed from 
u that Church, .... which with our own eyes 
" we plainly saw had deviated from the holy 
" Fathers, and from the primitive and Catholic 
" Church. But we have approached, as near as 
" possible, to the church of the apostles of the 
" ancient Catholic Bishops and Fathers, which 
" we know was sound, and, as Tertullian says, a 
" spotless virgin."* 

From this passage it follows that your Esta- 
blished Church separated from ours ; that it 
made a schism between us ; and why ? Because 
according to Jewel, our Church had visibly de- 
parted from the Holy Fathers and the primitive 
Church. Then according to him, as well as in 
my belief, we must attach ourselves not to the 
Scriptures alone, but also, and according to the 

* JeweVs Apology.) section x. — CampheWs Translation. 



88 ANSWER TO THE [part I. 

precept of St. Paul, to the oral traditions known 
by the teaching of the Holy Fathers ; we must 
separate from those who separate from the faith 
and practice of the primitive Church. This is 
precisely what I maintain against Mr. Faber ; 
whilst he holds against Bishop Jewel and myself, 
that it is sufficient to be guided exclusively by 
the Scripture. 

In his celebrated sermon at St. Paul's Cross 
in 1550, three years before the publication of his 
Apology, Jewel exclaimed thus : " O Gregory ! 
" O Augustin ! O Jerome! O Chrysostom ! O 

" Leo ! O Dionysius ! O Anacletus ! &c 

" If we be deceived herein, ye are they that have 
" deceived us. You have taught us these schisms 
" and divisions, you have taught us these 
" heresies." After this, enumerating at length 
the controverted points on the Eucharist, he 
denies that in the first six centuries, the real 
presence, the change of substance, the adoration 
of Jesus Christ present under the species of 
bread and wine were ever taught ; and continues 
in these words : " If any man alive were able to 
44 prove any of these articles, by any one clear or 
" plain clause or sentence, either of the Scrip- 



PART I ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM, 8& 

44 tu res, or of the old doctors, or of any old 
" general council, or by any example of the 

" primitive church I speak not this in 

" vehemency of spirit, or heat of talk, but even 
" as before God, by the way of simplicity and 
" truth ; . . . . if any one of all our adversaries 
" be able to avouch any one of all these articles, 
44 by any such sufficient authority of Scriptures, 
44 doctors or councils, as I have required, as 1 
" said before, so say I now again, I am content 
" to yield unto him, and to subscribe." Is this, 
I beseech you, the language of a man who be- 
lieves that the Scriptures contain all that is neces- 
sary to salvation ? Will Mr. Faber hold such 
language ? Will he who has read in the Discus- 
sion Amicale texts so clear and numerous on 
the real presence, the change of substance and 
the adoration, engage with me to subscribe upon 
one single testimony of the Fathers, to all the 
rest of the Catholic doctrine ? In the place of 
Bishop Jewel would not he have expressed him- 
self rather as follows : 44 Leave all your troubie- 
44 some quotations from the Fathers : shew me 
4i your Eucharistic mysteries in the Bible. You 
ft will not rind a syllable about them in the 



90 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART t. 



" whole New Testament. This utter silence 
44 proves two things ; first, that you are wrong 
" in your ideas of the real presence, since these 
" immediate consequences of it are no where to 
44 be found ; secondly, that they cannot in any 
44 case claim our assent, since all articles of faith 
44 ought to be found in the Scriptures, and there 
44 they are not." But Jewel holds quite another 
language. A Catholic Doctor could not express 
himself more energetically on a subject of pure 
oral tradition, or with more veneration on the 
authority of the Holy Fathers. He was not 
therefore of the opinion of those, who two years 
later drew up the 6th article. Jewel, it is true, 
had a seat in their assembly : he ought even to 
have been the soul of them, as he was the ablest 
of them all. How then came he to permit such 
an article to be composed ? How came he still 
further to subscribe it ? It is no business of mine 
to make him appear consistent with himself ;* 

* Mr. Faber is much dissatisfied with the anecdote I have 
related of Bishop Jewel in the Discussion Amicule^ vol. 2, p. 1 35. 
He does not consider it worthy of credit. I will remark, that 
it is related by Dr. Smith, Bishop of Chalcedon, who printed it 
in 1654, at the age of 87 years, and who therefore was born in 
1567, three years at least before the death of Jewel, which took 
place September 22d, 1571. This Dr. Smith venerated by all 



part It] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 91 

but I flatter myself that neither Mr. Faber nor 
any other will henceforth attempt to defend the 
6th article, and support its doctrine. 

What appears particularly to embarrass and 
chagrin Mr. Faber, is that he finds himself com- 
pelled to have recourse to tradition at the very 
time when he has just pronounced it of no use, 
For being soon obliged to express himself upon 

who knew him, after a long and saintly career, left behind him a 
singular reputation for virtue and piety. Such a character could 
not be suspected of falsehood. He had printed the anecdote 
first in 1614, when the two Catholic Lords were still living 
from whom he had received it, and also the physician, Dr. 
Twin, who had told it to those two Lords, as he had heard it 
from Genebrand, the chaplain of Jewel, to whom the Bishop 
when dying had confided it. 

In 1614 it would have been easy and natural to contradict 
this narration. But Mr. Faher comes too late at this time of 
day to call it in question. He has no proofs whatever to weigh 
against the authority of the pious and venerable Dr. Smith, and 
justify him in accusing the good Bishop either of imposture or 
credulity in believing or publishing such a calumny. For the 
rest, Jewel, brought up a Catholic, became a concealed Pro- 
testant nnder Henry 8th, a declared friend of the Zwinglian 
Peter Martyr, under Edward 6th, a Catholic under Mary for a 
short time, a Zwinglian during his stay in Germany, and Epis- 
copalian in fine under Elizabeth, from whom he did not scruple 
to accept the see of Salisbury. He was possessed of much 
information considering the age in which he lived, and the short- 
ness of his life. It has been said of him, from his writings and 
conduct, that he had a good memory, but little judgment. 



92 ANSWER TO THE [FART I. 

the canon of the Scriptures, he speaks thus; 
page 51 — " In the judgment of the Bishop, tra- 
" dition is of such vital importance, that the very 
44 canon of Scripture itself depends upon it. By 
44 renouncing, therefore, the tradition of the Latin 
44 Church, we effectively invalidate the authority 
44 of the canon of Scripture." Admire the can- 
dour of the Rector. Without appearing so to 
do, he dexterously makes me substitute the tra- 
dition of the Latin Church, which I never once 
mentioned, for the universal tradition, which is 
the sole subject of the present question. 44 One 
44 might almost imagine," he adds, 44 that our 
44 Latin brethren deemed us altogether ignorant 
44 of the very existence of the early ecclesiastical 
44 writers." No, Sir, we imagine no such thing ; 
they are in your hands : we only lament that 
you after all abandon them. Is not primitive 
tradition composed in fact from their writings 
and testimonies ? Did you not receive from 
their hands the canon of the Scriptures ? You 
are ready yourselves to assure us that you did 
so : 44 we resort not to the naked dogmatical 
44 authority of the see of Rome" — you tell us with 
a tone of harshness, and a want of politeness 



PART I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 93 

more in character with the sixteenth and seven- 
teenth centuries than with our own — " but to 
" the sufficient evidence borne to that effect in 
" the yet existing documents of the primitive 
" church/' Undoubtedly ; and this is what I 
have often represented to you. You ought then 
in prudence to have given up your sixth article : 
vou ought not to have set out with declaring the 
Scripture alone sufficient for salvation ; and 
that the instructions verbally given by the apos- 
tles had been afterwards inserted in the writings 
subsequently published by them. You ought 
not to have said, at the very time when you were 
forced to observe yourself the precept of St. 
Paul, that it did not apply to us, and was even 
inapplicable very soon after it was given. In 
fine, you ought not to have maintained with so 
much assurance that the Scripture was all- 
sufficient, at the moment when you were seeking 
for apostolical instructions in the Fathers, and 
apart from the Scripture, to prove even its 
authenticity. Save yourself, if you can, from 
the charge of self-contradiction ; and look out, 
if you please, some other than me to make 
you consistent with yourself. 



94 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART II. 



PART THE SECOND. 



ON THE HOLY EUCHARIST. 

CHAPTER THE FIRST. 
When I received a letter addressed to me by 
the Rev. G. S. Faber, Dec. 20, 1825, I imagined 
that I should find him a man of learning well 
versed in theological science, in the reading and 
doctrine of the Fathers of the Church ; an eccle- 
siastic the friend of peace, deploring like myself 
the fatal separation effected in the sixteenth 
century, by a policy as blind as it was inte* 
rested ; a pastor disposed to unite his efforts 
with mine to re-unite Christians but too long 
separated, and to bring back to the bosom of 
unity, hearts formed for a mutual good under- 
standing, for loving each other, and conjointly 
strengthening upon earth the kingdom of our 
divine Saviour. O flattering hopes and charitable 
anticipations, why did you so quickly vanish ? 
Why at the very first reading did my anta- 
gonist's work present only a mass of imaginary 
Difficulties, laid to the charge of what he chooses 



chap. I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 95 

to call Romanism f Why so much gall dis- 
charged upon the Discussion Amicale, and mixed 
with so many unmerited praises of its author, 
whom he does not know ? That Mr. Faber is 
an able writer, I am quite disposed to think ; 
that he is much followed as a preacher, I can 
readily believe : but that he is a judicious and 
pacific controvertist I can boldly deny ; and, 
Sir, you will soon be of my conviction by pur- 
suing with me his discussion on the Holy 
Eucharist. 

I. He begins by laying down the question as 
he understands it ; page 52. — u The disagree- 
" ment between the Church of England and the 
" Church of Rome, in regard to the doctrine of 
" the Holy Eucharist, chiefly respects the sup- 
u posed process denominated transubstantiation. 
44 .... Here, if I mistake not, is the main dis- 
" agreement between the two churches. With 
" respect to the doctrine of the real presence, 
" they both hold it." If the Rector were speak- 
ing of the doctrine taught in England for 100 
years, or thereabouts, from the reformation of 
Elizabeth down to 1662, I should be entirely of 
his opinion ; for during that time the real pre- 



96 ANSWER TO THE Part ii.] 

sence was the most prevalent doctrine. 44 The 
"King/' as Bishop Andrews testifies in his 
answer to Card. Bellarmine's Apology, 44 the 
44 King (James 1st) acknowledges Jesus to be 
truly present, and truly to be adored in the Eu- 
charist. I also with St. Ambrose 44 adore the 
44 flesh of Christ in the mysteries." (Bishop 
Andrews, ch. 8, p. 194.) Would Mr. Faber hold 
such language ? 44 The most sensible Protest- 
44 ants/' says Bishop Forbes, [de Eucharistia 1. *2, 
c. 2, § 9,) 44 do not doubt that Christ is to be 
44 adored in the Eucharist. For in the reception 
44 of the Eucharist, Christ is to be adored with the 
44 true worship of latria. 'Tis a monstrous error 
44 of the rigid Protestants, who deny that Christ 
44 is to be adored in the Eucharist, except only 
" with an inward adoration of the mind, but not 
44 with any outward act of adoration ; as kneel- 
44 ing, or other like posture of the body." Yet 
is not Mr. Faber obliged by the existing rubric, 
to teach this monstrous error P 

44 I suppose," says the learned Mr. Thorndike, 
(Epil. 1. 3, c. 30, p. 350.) 44 the body and blood 
44 of Christ may be adored, wheresoever they are ; 
44 and must be adored by a good Christian, 



CHAP. I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 97 

" where the custom of the church, which a Chris- 
" tiau is obliged to communicate with, requires 
" it. And is not the presence thereof in the 
" sacrament of the Eucharist a just occasion 
" presently to express, by that bodily act of 
" adoration, that inward honour which we always 
" carry towards our Lord Christ, as God? Mr. 
Faber would exclaim, " take care how you hold 
" such an opinion." 

I might here also quote Ridley, Hooker, Casau- 
bon, Montague, Taylor, and Cosin.* Such was 
at that time the doctrine of the most celebrated 
theologians of the church of England : they 
adored Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, because 
they believed him there present. 

II. With the year 1662 we are introduced to 
a new epoch. We rind your church solemnly 
proscribing the adoration of the Eucharist. f 
By a necessary consequence of this sacrilegious 
proscription, the Calvinistic opinion is intro- 
duced into the kingdom, it reaches through the 

* See the Discussion Amicale T. 1. pp. 314, 315, 316, and 
Essay towards a proposal for Catholic Communion, chap. 5. 

\ Seethe concluding notice of the Communion Service in the 
13ook of Common Prayer. 

H 



98 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART II. 



schools, and is heard in the pulpits of the estab- 
lished church. And in fact, if the adoration 
necessarily supposes the presence ; explain it as 
you will, the presence obliges also to the adora- 
tion.* From the moment it is forbidden to 
adore, it is equally unlawful to believe Jesus 

* Christum in actione ccenas vere et substantialiter praesentem, 
in spiritu et veritate adorand um, nemo negat nisi qui cum sacra- 
mentariis vel negat, vel dubitat de praesentia Christi in coena. 
KemnifiusT.%, Edit. Francofurt. p. 150, No. 4 Exam. Cone, 
Trid. 

In 1670 the ministers of Strasbourg presented in a body to 
the magistrates a request by which they demanded, among 
other articles, that all who approached to the Lord's Supper 
should be required to receive it kneeling ; they instanced the 
example of the church in Saxony, and gave as a motive the faith 
of the real presence, adding that if, according to the expression 
of St. Paul, " every knee should bow at the name of Jesus," 
much more should it be done before his sacred person. 

Zwinglius could not comprehend how those who believe 
Jesus Christ to be present, can escape the guilt of sin in not 
adoring him. ( In Exei\ Each, ad Luther.) Calvin declares 
loudly, and Beza after him, that it always appeared to him most 
conclusive to say, that if Jesus Christ be present in the bread, 
he is there to be adored. Nos semper sic rationati sumus : si 
Ckristus est in pane, esse sub pane adorandum. (con. Luther.) 
But neither Calvin and his disciples, nor Mr. Faber and the 
modern Church of England men, adore Christ in the sacrament : 
therefore they do not believe him there present, however strong, 
and as it were, Catholic, may be the expressions, which they 
often affect to use. 



chap. I ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. QiJ 

Christ present in the Eucharist. We must then 
pass with Mr. Faber to that kind of change, 
which he presents us with so much self-com- 
placency, that moral change, which consecrates 
the bread and wine, it is true, for a religious 
ceremony, but leaves them untouched in their 
substance. Thus the sacrament will exhibit 
nothing but empty and material symbols, and 
we must only speak of it as an inanimate figure 
without any reality ; for, 1 beseech you, what is 
a figurative presence, but a real absence P 

You who have rejected with your church the 
adoration of Jesus Christ in his sacrament, you 
who with her condemn it as shameful idolatry, 
how can you come forth and tell us that you are 
agreed with us on the real presence ? Ah, Sir, 
if you were convinced of this holy presence, you 
would be seized with awe and trembling on 
approaching the holy table ; you would anni- 
hilate yourself before your God, veiled under 
the sacramental species, but revealed to your 
faith ; you would receive him with every testi- 
mony of profound and lively adoration ; and 
after the humble centurion of the gospel, you 

would say with your forefathers, with ours, and 

h 2 



100 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

with us, " O Lord, I am not worthy that thou 
" shouldst enter under my roof ; but say only 
" the word, and my soul shall be healed." This 
was the language of your country for eleven 
hundred years. You can no longer hold and 
pronounce it with the sentiment and attitude of 
adoration ! Alas ! for you it exists no longer — 
I do not say upon the altar, since you proscribe 
the very name and idea, but upon the table of 
the Lord's Supper ; — you have nothing but bread 
and wine. The body of Jesus Christ, you say, 
is become a stranger to earth and her forsaken 
inhabitants, since it has been in heaven. Ado- 
ration therefore in you would be real idolatry. 
Thus Mr. Faber is mistaken when he assigns 
transubstantiation as the fundamental point 
of opposition between his church and ours. He 
ought to have assigned the doctrine of the real 
presence, by reducing the first and principal 
question between Catholics and modern mem- 
bers of the Church of England to the following 
terms : Is the body of Christ really present in the 
Eucharist, or is it not .? This question more- 
over holds the first rank from its very high 
importance. In fact the conviction of the real 



CHAP. I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 101 

presence gives to the faith of the true Catholic 
an impulse perfectly sublime ; and then it calls 
him back to the acknowledgment of his own 
lowliness, of his profound unworthiness, and 
concentrates all his powers in silent adoration. 
To him it is a source of the most delightful 
emotions, and at the same time a principle of 
spiritual strength, of love, joy, consolation, and 
hope : in fine, it transports him above all terres- 
trial things, and in some measure deities him 
upon earth. Tell me candidly, Sir, has the cold 
and lifeless opinion of the figure ever produced, 
or can it ever produce any thing like this ? 

It is sufficiently strange that a man persuaded 
of the real absence of the body of Jesus Christ 
from the sacrament, should take any great in- 
terest in transubstantiation. Does any one 
torment himself to discover the mode of a thing^s 
existence, which he does not believe to exist at 
all ? To what purpose would a man dispute 
of the manner in which the prodigy of the real 
presence is effected, if all the while he disavowed 
the belief of a real presence ? Even if the Rector 
should successfully demonstrate to Catholics, 
that the change of substance in the Eucharist is 



102 ANSWER TO THE jpART n. 

inadmissible, he would not thereby prove that 
the reality of the presence is also inadmissible. 
He would still have to combat and overturn the 
Lutheran opinion. For the real presence is 
understood in two ways ; either by the change 
of the substance of bread into the substance of 
Chrises body, as the Catholics hold ; or by the 
junction or union of the two substances, as the 
Lutherans contend. On the other hand, the 
same proofs, which establish the doctrine of 
trans ubstantiation, demonstrate that of the real 
presence. As soon as the substance of the sacred 
body has taken place of the substance of bread, 
we must necessarily believe and adore Jesus 
Christ under the figure and form of bread, under 
the sensible qualities of a substance which no 
longer exists. You perceive, Sir, that the prin- 
cipal difference and the greatest opposition 
between our church and yours, is in the real 
presence. Transubstantiation is but secondary. 
It springs from the doctrine of the reality, but it 
follows, and never precedes it. By placing it 
in the foremost rank, the Rector has made a 
mistake very surprising in a theologian. He 
lias badly stated the question, because he has 



CHAP. I.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 103 

erroneously conceived of the Holy Eucharist. He 
appears to have but confused ideas of our mys- 
teries : and hence he has not perceived the prin- 
cipal opposition of the two churches where it 
really exists ; but has placed it where it is not. 

111. At last I arrive at two consoling pages, 
full of wise and judicious reflections.* I have 
read them, and read them again with great 
satisfaction ; and I feel much pleasure in thus 
openly making the acknowledgment. Why are 
such pages so rarely found in the work to which 
I am replying ? If it be truly painful, when 
we are labouring to reconcile two parties at 
variance, to And in one, hostile dispositions and 
difficulties raised in an arbitrary manner, it is 
delightful to hear both express the same senti- 
ments on any question. Here Mr. Faber unites 
with us in censuring the temerity of those theo- 
logians, who inflated with vain science, and 
imposed upon by presumptuous suggestions of 
reason, imagine consequences absurd and con- 
tradictory in the doctrines of the real presence 
and transubstantiation.f He appears to address 

* pp. 54, 54. 

+ It is plain that he alludes to several writers well known in 
England, among others to Tillotson. 



104 ANSWER TO THE [fart II. 

such vain and restless minds in these words of 
Ditton — " Let them leave their cavils and dis- 
44 putes. . . .and take all that they rind clearly 
" revealed— always keeping in view that although 
" the Divine wisdom and goodness cannot in 
" any case oblige them to believe a thing really 
44 absurd and contradictory. . . .they may never- 
44 theless be obliged to believe. . . .many things 
44 which obstinate prejudices represent to them 
44 as absurd. . . .but which only appear to them 
44 to be so, from their having too much accus- 
44 tomed themselves to judge of the ways of God, 
44 by those of men."* 

With Cosin, Bishop of Durham, Mr. Faber 
acknowledges the possibility of the presence in 
several places, and with Forbes that of a change 
of substance. The first expresses himself as 
follows : 44 We confess with the Holy Fathers, 
44 that the manner is ineffable and unsearchable, 
44 that is, not to be enquired and searched into 
44 by reason, but to be believed by faith alone. 
44 For although it seems incredible, that in so 
44 great a distance of place, Christ's flesh should 
4 come to us, to become our food ; yet we must 
* Humphrey Ditton* part l,scct 14, on Resur, 



chap. I] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 105 

" remember, how much the power of the Holy 
" Spirit is above our understanding, and how 
" foolish it is to measure his immensity by our 
" capacity. But what our understanding com- 
" prehends not, let faith conceive."* 

Now you shall hear the second : " Many Pro- 
" testants too boldly and dangerously deny 
" that God has power to transubstantiate the 
" bread into the body of Christ. 'Tis true all 
" own that what implies a contradiction cannot 
" be done. But because, in particular, nobody 
" certainly knows what is the essence of every 
" thing, and consequently what implies a con- 
" tradiction, and what not ; 'tis, without ques- 
4 tion, a rashness in any to put limits to God's 
" power. I approve the opinion of the divines 
" of Wittenberg, who assert the power of God 
" to be so great, that he can change the sub- 
" stance of the bread and wine into the body 
" and blood of Christ."f These principles 
which are equally those of the Rector, and 
Bishops Forbes and Cosin, are also quite con- 
formable to those of Grotius, Leibnitz, Molanus, 

* Cosin Hist. Transub. p. 36, sect. 5, n. 4. 
t Bp, Forbes De Euch. I. 1, c. 2. 



106 ANSWER TO THE [PART II- 

and your most learned countrymen, who would 
all have repeated that beautiful invocation of 
one of your bishops : O God incarnate, how 
" thou canst give us thy flesh to eat, and thy 
" blood to drink ! How thy flesh is meat 
" indeed ! How thou who art in heaven, art 
" present on the altar ! I can by no means 
" explain. But / firmly believe it all, because 
44 thou hast said it ; and I firmly rely on thy 
44 love, and on thy omnipotence to make good 
44 thy word, though the manner of doing it I 
44 cannot comprehend."* 

Since the time of this religious and truly 
philosophical invocation, theology has sustained 
a terrible shock in your church. Bishop Ken 
and Mr. Faber were brought up in quite oppo- 
site doctrines on the subject of the Eucharist ; 
the former in the principle of reality, the latter 
in that of figure, which so far from inspiring its 
cold partisans with the sublime faith of the 
Bishop, would not even allow the Rector to 
admire it. Still let us congratulate him on 
his having rejected as rash and presumptuous 



* Dr. Ken, Bishop of Bath and Wells.— Exposition, 1685, 



CHAP, i.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 107 

the consequences which many of his brethren 
have imputed to the Catholic doctrine, and 
censured the declamations with which their 
pulpits have been made to resound in that 
positive and decisive tone, which imposes on 
minds incapable of fathoming metaphysical 
questions. 

Mr. Faber, as I feel happy again to acknow- 
ledge, beheld the difficulty with a great deal of 
just discrimination when he reduced it to this 
simple question of fact : " Was transubstantia- 
" tion revealed by Jesus Christ, or not ?" But 
he soon after, without being aware of it, sub- 
stitutes the dogma of the real presence for that 
of transubstantiation ; for the greater part of 
his arguments are directed against the reality. 
I am induced to remark this, not so much to 
reproach him with it, as to exhibit the want of 
accuracy in his ideas. For after all it is evident, 
that if there be no real presence, there can be no 
transubstantiation in the Eucharist. Let us 
now examine his proofs against the real presence. 
Hitherto it has been the usual course of divines 
to examine the promise made by Jesus Christ, 
before its accomplishment. Such is not the 



108 ANSWER TO THE [p ART n . 

plan of the Rector : he returns to his usual 
method of inverting the order of his ideas. He 
enters upon the discussion of the scripture proofs 
by the words of institution ; taking care how- 
ever to discourse later of the promise which our 
Saviour had made long before hand. He must 
allow us to bring back things to their natural 
order : we will follow him afterwards in the 
inverted march which he has chosen to adopt. 



CHAP, ii.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



109 



CHAPTER THE SECOND. 

PROOFS FROM SCRIPTURE OF OUR DOCTRINES ON THE 
HOLY EUCHARIST. 



I. I think you will not require me to repeat 
to you at length the arguments developed 
in my first volume, from p. 250 to 279. Be 
so kind as to read again this portion of the 
Discussion Amicale. I content myself with 
presenting you a summary sketch of the argu- 
ments which prove that Jesus Christ had pro- 
mised to give us, not the figure, but the reality 
of his sacred body. 

1. He begins by reminding the Jews of the 
great miracle of the multiplication of the loaves, 
which had taken place before their eyes the 
preceding day, and which alone ought to have 
gained him their entire confidence. He re- 
proaches them with their backwardness in con- 
fiding in him, and establishes his claim to their 
confidence. What is the meaning of this exor- 
dium, and this manner of opening himself to 
them imperfectly and by degrees ? Whence 



110 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

comes it that he reminds them at every turn of 
the necessity of faith due to his character, his 
miracles, his heavenly origin and divinity ? — 
What is the object of these recommendations, 
precautions and preliminaries ? What end has 
he in view, and what does he intend to propose 
to them ? Certainly something extraordinary, 
and extremely difficult to receive. Let us attend 
to his words : "1 am the living bread .... if 
" any man eat of this bread he shall live for 
" ever : and the bread that I will give, is my 
" flesh for the life of the world. "* A declaration 
so strange, so far removed from human ideas, 
could not relate to a figurative eating, which is 
simple enough. The natural sense of the words 
as the Jews have just heard them, astonishes 
and confounds their minds. They judge it 
impossible for them to eat the flesh of Jesus. 
The carnal manner which they conceive inse- 
parable from this manducation, evidently sup- 
poses the reality ; and no less evidently ex- 
cludes the figure. It was the reality therefore 
which they understood. 

2. So far from undeceiving them, or explain- 
* St. John vi. v. 51 , 52. 



CHAP. II] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. \\J 

ing his words in the figurative sense, our Lord 
subsequently repeats no less than six times his 
first declaration with expressions every time 
stronger. The energetic words in which he 
expressed himself even shocked several of his 
disciples ; they declared that they were too hard 
for them to bear. They must then have con- 
veyed the sense of the reality , incomprehensible 
to the human mind ; and not the figurative 
sense, which is so conformable to our ideas. 

3. Jesus adds, that if they are scandalized at 
what he has now told them, they will be much 
more so when they see him ascend where he was 
before : that is, that the accomplishment of his 
promise will appear to them much more incre- 
dible, when he shall no longer be present before 
their eyes. But a figurative manducation be- 
comes still more easy after his ascension, that 
splendid proof of his divinity ; whereas the real 
manducation is far more incredible, for you 
gentlemen especially who are for ever repeating 
to us, that his body is as far from our altars as 
heaven is from earth. Therefore it was not a 
figurative, but a real manducation which our 
Saviour had announced, 



112 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART II. 



4. Nevertheless, in order to remove from their 
imagination the crudity of a carnal manduca- 
tion, Jesus adds, that his words are not to be 
estimated according to human reason, but ac- 



" the flesh" (or human intelligence) " profiteth 
" nothing."* But no, exclaims Mr. Faber : 

* Spiritus est qui vivificat, caro non prodest quidquam : quod 
indicat ista Spiritus Sancti auxilio intelligi oportere. Carnem 
enim, hoc est rationem humanam in hisce divinis rebus nihil 
prodesse, hoc est, caligare et ineptire. — Centur, Lutheran. 
Cent 1, c. 4. Mr. Faber would have it that the ancient fathers 
understood this 64th verse, as he does. He says at p. 87, 
"that it may be more distinctly seen how widely the ancients 
*' differed from the Bishop of Aire, I subjoin, as a specimen, 
M the gloss of Athanasius :" and then he gives a translation 
worse than incorrect, as will be readily seen by the Latin version 
of the Learned Benedictines, as follows : " De seipso dixit 
a Christus, filius hominis et Spiritus; ut ex illo, qua? corpus 
u suum spectarent ; ex Spiritu vero, spiritualem suam et inteU 
u ligibilem, verissimamque divinitatem declaruret, (and after 
u quoting verses 62, 63, and 64) nam hie etiam utrumque de 

se dixit, carnem et spiritum : et spiritum a came distinxil, ut 
" non solum quod apparel, sed etiam quod invisibile est credentes 
u discerent ea quoe ipse loqueretur non esse carnalia sed spiritualia. 
" Quot enim hominibus corpus satis esset ad esum, ut illud totius 
" mundifieret aliment um ? Sed ideo meminet ascensionis Filii 
" hominis in cesium, ut a corporali cogitatione ipsos retraheret, 
u at que hinc ediscerent carnem, de qua locutus fuerat, cibum e 
u superniS) coelestem et spiritualem alimoniam ab ipso dari : 




CHAP. H.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



113 



" our Lord teaches us, that his language is to be 
" interpreted figuratively ; not literally. yy And I 

" nam q\ioe locutas sum vobis. mquit, spiritus et vita sunt : quod 
66 perinde est ac si diceret: quod ostenditur et datur pro mundi 
" salute caro est^ quam ego gesfoi sed haec vobis cum ejus 
" sanguine a me spirit u alder esca dabitur : ita ut haec spirit ualiter 
" unicuique tribuatur, et fiat singulis tut amen in resurrectionem 
" vita? wternce." Kp. 4, ad Serap. Episc. Thmuitanum. 

Observe these words; but this Jlesli with its blood shall be 
given to you by me in a spiritual manner ; this is precisely our 
doctrine. There is a wide difference between saying that the 
flesh and blood are given in a spiritual manner, and saying that 
they are given in figure only. A body in figure is not a body ; 
but a spiritualized body is a real body still, it is such as the 
bodies of the elect will be in heaven. Seminatur corpus a?iimale, 
surgtt corpus spirituale. The Hector has taken the passage of 
St. Athanasius in a wrong sense from beginning to end. 

In the Discussion Amicale, pp. 263, 264, vol. 1, I said, 
64 Christ when he announced his ascension, insinuated to his 
" disciples, and gave them sufficiently (o comprehend, that in 
" the manducation of his (lesh, the senses would have no share, 
" as they had imagined, and that his presence would be neither 
66 palpable nor visible; since according to this natural presence., 
a they would see him disappear and ascend into heaven. He 
"further instructed them that they ought not to judge of his 
" body as of other human bodies, incapable of themselves of a 
"similar ascension: that his would prove divinely constituted; 
" his flesh, that of the Son of God, upon which he could stamp 
a an almighty power, and which he could easily change and 
u give in a supernatural state." I thank Mr. Faber for having 
shewn me that without being aware of this passage of St. 
Athanasius, I had been so fortunate as to light in part upon the 
ideas of that great Prelate. 



114 ANSWER TO THE [part It. 

rejoin that it is not so ; and cannot be so. For 
if by this sentence, our Lord had given them to 
understand that his discourse was to be inter- 
preted in a figurative sense, those Jews who had 
revolted at the gross idea of a real manducation, 
and those of his disciples who had found his 
words a hard saying beyond bearing, would 
immediately have been pacified ; they would 
have been reconciled to the discourse of their 
master, and more attached to him than ever. 
And yet it was immediately after this last sen- 
fence that they withdrew, abandoned their 
master, and walked no more with him ! There- 
fore this last declaration did not indicate the 
figurative sense, 

5. Jesus reproaches the disciples with not 
believing his word : " there are some of you that 
" believe not." But if he had explained himself 
in the figurative sense, these would have be- 
lieved ; none would have merited the reproach 
of incredulity. He adds, that no one can 
believe in what he has said, unless it be given 
him by the Father. But to believe in a figura- 
tive manducation, there is no need of any par- 
ticular grace. 



CHAP. II.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 115 

6. The doctrine of Jesus on the promised 
manducation prevented many Jews from be- 
lieving in him ; and induced many disciples to 
forsake him. Now our doctrine on this point 
prevents many Christians from adopting our 
creed, and causes some to abandon it ; w hereas 
the present doctrine of your church in general 
attaches its members to it, and withholds those 
who would otherwise come over to us. Our 
doctrine therefore, and not yours, is conform- 
able to that of Jesus Christ. 

7. Lastly ; and I beg you to attend well to this 
final observation. Several disciples chase to with- 
draw from their master, even after the declara- 
tion he had just made, rather than rely on his 
word for the manner of accomplishing what he 
promised : — -but the apostles remain attached to 
him ; and building on his divinity, depend upon 
his power for the execution of his promise. But 
the former would not have abandoned such a 
master through unwillingness to believe so simple 
a thing as a manducation explained in Mr. 
Faber's way, in a figurative sense : nor would 
the latter have needed to rely for their belief, 

upon his divinity and omnipotence. There- 

i 2 



116 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX n . 

fore neither party could have understood this 
manducation in the figurative sense of the 
Rector : and therefore I conclude that the true 
sense is that of the real presence ; that being 
the only sense which can explain the opposite 
conduct of the disciples who departed, and the 
apostles who remained. 

II. I now ask you, Sir, if the long and memo- 
rable scene at Capharnaum must not have made 
a deep and indelible impression upon the apos- 
tles ? In how great expectation must they have 
been held by a promise so extraordinary and 
wonderful, that it could have been conceived 
and proclaimed by none but God himself! It 
must have required no less than the miracles 
which they witnessed every day, and the full 
conviction of the divinity of their master, to keep 
them in the assurance that he would one day 
realize his promise, however unintelligible to 
them was the manner in which he would execute 
it. This unheard-of scene must have frequently 
returned to their minds ; but especially at the 
memorable time, when, after the paschal supper, 
and the washing of their feet, being again seated 
at table by his order, and seeing him take bread 



CHAP. II] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 117 

in his venerable hands, bless ii, and lift up his 
eyes to heaven in prayer — they heard him 
solemnly pro no mice those words, take and eat, 
this is my body. These words dart light at once 
into their minds ; their expectation is accom- 
plished, their hope and faith are crowned : and 
even we ourselves, Sir, though at so great a dis- 
tance from this grand event, assist at it in 
imagination, and partake of the banquet of our 
Saviour. We can imagine that we have just 
heard him, as we heard him before in the syna- 
gogue of Capharnaum. Here, as on the former 
occasion, we enter into the sentiments of the 
apostles : with them we perceive in a moment 
the manifest connexion between the promise of 
this great favour, and its accomplishment ; 
between the food promised, and the food be- 
stowed ; the flesh which the Lord was to give 
them to eat, and that which he actually gives 
them to eat. We compare the narrative of St. 
John with those of the other evangelists : these 
words of the former, " the bread which I will 
" give is my flesh for the life of the world," with 
the words of St. Luke : " This is my body which 
" is given for you." In both, the subject is the 



118 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

same ; there, as here, the same meaning, the 
same mystery, the same truth. We further re- 
mark that this great miracle, designated before- 
hand in terms precise and expressive, is now 
announced in the most clear and simple terms 
which language can furnish ; and we say, Jesus 
Christ pronounced the words of institution in 
the same sense as those of the promise ; but we 
have just seen that he certainly pronounced the 
words of promise in the sense of the real pre- 
sence. Moreover, the apostles must have given 
to the words of institution the same sense in 
which they had taken the words of promise : but 
that sense was assuredly that of the real pre- 
sence : therefore in the same sense they under- 
stood the words of institution. 

IIL If notwithstanding, it will afford you 
satisfaction for me to resume the retrograde 
movement of Mr. Faber, and go back from 
the institution to the promise ; be it so, I 
am quite willing. But what advantage will 
the Rector gain for his opinion of a figurative 
presence ? This we shall soon see. Whether 
the words of promise are placed first, or intro- 
duced after those of institution, I see no differ- 



CHAP. II] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. H9 

ence, except in the subversion of natural order. 
The intimate relation between them renders 
them inseparable. They admit not of being- 
insulated, they demand comparison and juxta- 
position : so close is their natural union. This 
Mr. Faber ought to admit ; for he himself makes 
use of the 64th verse of the vi. ch. of St. John, 
to endeavour, if possible, to explain the words, 
" This is my body" in a figurative sense. He 
cannot therefore dispute my right to employ 
the same chapter, to shew that the words of 
institution import the real presence. 

It is indeed the indispensable duty of every 
commentator to bring together the ideas, which 
must at that time have occupied together the 
minds of the apostles. Who can doubt that the 
astonishing scene at Capharnaum was at this 
moment present to their memory ? Certainly 
we have sound reason to believe that so extraor- 
dinary a discourse as the one held by our Saviour 
on ih at occasion, followed up and inculcated 
by him with equal force and perseverance, ad- 
dressed first to the Jews, then to the disciples, 
and always with particular energy, must have 
left a deep impression on the minds of the 



120 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

apostles. Judge of this, Sir, by St. John. About 
seventy years had rolled by, when he retraced 
this scene with so animated a pen, so much 
circumstantial precision and such confident 
recollection, that when you read it, you seem to 
see it passing before your eyes. How much 
more strongly then must it have been remem- 
bered by the apostles at the end of a few months ; 
and especially when being prepared for some- 
thing extraordinary, and all their attention 
fixed, and riveted upon their master, they heard 
these words from his mouth : Take, eat : this is 
my body which shall be delivered for you ! We 
may well suppose them exclaiming at that 
moment, " Behold now the accomplishment of 
what he had promised us ! This is the bread 
of which he spoke to us ; the bread which came 
down from heaven to give life to the world: this 
is the reality of that mysterious declaration ; 
Amen, amen, I say unto you : except you eat the 
flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you 
shall not have life in you .... He that eateth my 
flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting 
life:. . . . My flesh is meat indeed; and my 
blood is drink indeed.... He that eateth my 



CHAP, n.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 121 

flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and 
I in him. These words must then have loudly 
echoed in the ears of the apostles : and I beg 
you, Sir, to tell me honestly, whether such 
language as this, and affirmations thus repeated 
can be reconciled with a metaphorical sense ; or 
if they do not necessarily exclude a figurative 
acceptation ? Is it not true that the words my 
flesh is meat indeed, rigorously express the 
reality ? For after all, flesh in figure would be 
at most but figurative nourishment ; it never 
could be meat indeed. It is therefore manifest, 
that the words of promise import the reality ; 
and since the words of institution cannot be 
susceptible of a different signification, we must 
acknowledge in them also the real presence. 

Need I go farther ? I am willing certainly, 
if it be required, to separate the words, this is 
my body ; and to consider them by themselves. 
I maintain that they must always exhibit to us 
the real presence. Otherwise instead of inter- 
preting the words of Jesus Christ, we must 
change them ; we must make him say the very 
reverse of what he did say. For if he only left 
us the figure, it follows that what he declared to 



122 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part ii. 



be his body, is not his body ; inasmuch as the 
sign of a thing is not the thing itself, but only a 
representation of it. Then instead of these 
positive words, this is my body, we must make 
him say, at least in equivalent words, this is not 
my body, but only the figure of it. Moreover, 
would he not himself have led us astray, if the 
words we read in his testament, the living bread, 
the bread which came down from heaven — the 
flesh meat indeed — the body which shall be de- 
livered, express only a wrong idea ; while the 
words sign and figure, which we do not find at 
all, are the only ones which will open to us the 
true meaning of the scriptures ?* 

* I observed at page 293 of my first volume, " that before 
" the institution of the Eucharist, bread had never been taken 
" in the ordinary use of language, as a sign of any thing what- 
" ever." Mr. Faber replies, that in the Old Testament bread is 
sometimes mentioned as a sign of the body of Jesus Christ. 
I know it is; and the Rector must also know that a sign 
exhibited in some parts of the Old Testament is not therefore 
proved to have been employed in common use, in the language 
of conversation and the ordinary intercourse of life. This 
was what I said, and all that it was necessary to say ; parti- 
cularly when we reflect that before the descent of the Holy 
Ghost, poor Galileans as the apostles were, could not have 
been familiar with the books of the Old Testament. 

The Rector observes in a note, p. 92, that according to the 
ancient fathers, bread and wine in the Old Testament are signs 



chap. II.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 123 

IV. Mr. Faber with a good grace represents 
me as an enemy to metaphors, ready to " make 
" short work with the whole family of them." 
No, Sir, I am no enemy to them ; I know too 
well their value in writing or speaking, to wish 
to banish them. But because they are to be 
welcomed when they appear in features which 
are readily acknowledged, does it follow that 
we must admit them, when no such features 

and figures of our Lord's body and blood. And he thence 
concludes that they must be so in the New Testament. But 
any one else would have inferred that they could not be so in 
the New Testament. For the figures of the Old Testament 
were not repeated, but fulfilled by our blessed Saviour. If 
bread and wine are still only figures in the New Testament, the 
Rector with such an opinion, ought to have said, that in the 
Old Testament they were figures of the figure of the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ. 

I say the same of the loaves of proposition, figurative of the 
bread consecrated upon our altars. If ours is no more than it 
was heretofore, there is nothing but figure in both Testaments, 
and reality in neither. I conclude then, that on the one hand, 
the passages of the Old Testament where bread is given as a 
figure of Christ's body, do not prove that it was so considered 
in the ordinary use of language^ which was all that I advanced : 
but on the other hand, they prove that the bread which pre- 
figured the body of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament was to 
become and did become his real body in the New Testament. 
And thus, Sir, you behold the pretended objections of the 
Rector become in reality fresh proofs of the truth of the Catholic 
faith : sagittce parvulorum factce sunt plagw eorum ! 



124 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

appear ? I can see metaphors in the words, 
/ am a door, or 1 am the vine. The explana- 
tions which immediately follow them unfold 
the metaphors, which otherwise were not alto- 
gether new. But the words, this is my body, 
are not followed by any explanation : so that to 
find their interpretation we must recur to the 
vi. chapter of St. John ; and we have seen that 
so far from giving any idea of a figure, that 
chapter visibly imports the reality. 

This I think will suffice upon the arguments 
for, and against the real presence, drawn from 
the New Testament ; particularly if taken in 
conjunction with those which 1 have developed 
in the 6th and 7th letters of the Discussion 
Amicale. To me every difficulty appears cleared 
up on this subject, the question decided, and 
the real presence solidly established by the 
Sacred Scriptures. 



CHAP, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



125 



CHAPTER THE THIRD. 



PROOFS OF OUR DOCTRINE ON THE EUCHARIST 
FROM TRADITION. 



L A divine, a philosopher — every man accus- 
tomed to order in his ideas, will never fail to 
arrange them on paper with the same attention 
to method and perspicuity. Mr. Faber how- 
ever disdains to follow servilely in the train of 
the learned writers who have preceded him. He 
departs from the beaten track, and opens for 
himself a new one, just as his ideas bear him 
along from one subject to another. After 
trying in his iv. chapter to explain in a figura- 
tive sense the words of our Saviour, which with 
sublime simplicity express his real presence ; 
he leaves the Gospel all at once ; passes uncere- 
moniously to the writings of the Holy Fathers, 
which he abandons in the chapter following to 
resume the Holy Scripture, leaving this again 
altogether at chapter 6th, where he returns to 
the examination of the Fathers which he had 
begun without being able to finish. I cannot 



126 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt II. 

admire such disorder ; I shall pursue the regular 
course which I have prescribed to myself. 1 
have said sufficient to establish the truth of our 
doctrines by the Holy Scripture ; I now enter 
upon tradition, and the proofs I shall deduce 
from it will fill this third chapter. In the third 
part of this work, I purpose to collect the mis- 
takes, contradictions, studied suppressions, infi- 
delities and false imputations which are scattered 
through the whole of the Rector's production. 
I shall pass over these various matters as cur- 
sorily as possible, as being of minor importance, 
and for the most part regarding me personally. 

I must own, Sir, I had flattered myself that 
my three letters on the general and particular 
proofs from tradition would have found some 
favour with Mr. Faber. But he professes to 
discover nothing in them but an ingenious and 
subtile argumentation, and certain captious 
approximations, capable of deceiving none but 
the most unenlightened. They have not been 
elsewhere so esteemed, by able divines of various 
communions, and even of his own. It shall be 
my object to compel him to the same avowal as 
his brethren, or at least to silence. And I am 



CHAP. Hi.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 127 

sure of success, if I can present these proofs to 
his view, with the force and clearness which are 
so peculiarly their own. I begin by exhibiting 
to him and to you an analysis of the three letters, 
such as it appeared in a French paper at the 
time when the Discussion Amicale was brought 
over from London to Paris. 

II. 44 The secrecy universally observed during 
the first five centuries on the mysteries of the 
altar, is the principal point on which the labours 
of the author turn, on the subject of the Eucha- 
rist ; and may be called the pivot of his demon- 
stration. He beheld the command of this car- 
ried so far, that the Fathers did not hesitate to 
declare that it was better to shed their blood than 
to publish the mysteries ; and that in fact several 
did shed their blood, rather than reveal them. 
He saw that this discipline must of necessity be 
traced up to the apostles ; and after establishing 
this point of history beyond a doubt, he asks 
himself this question : What then was concealed 
beneath this secrecy relative to the mysteries of 
the altar ? It must have been either the figure 
of the Sacramentarian, or the real presence of 
the Catholic. In the first supposition, there 



128 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

could be no reason for keeping silence ; because 
with a figure there is no mystery ; and the law 
of secrecy would in that case have been esta- 
blished not only without any substantial motive, 
but even in opposition to the most cogent rea- 
sons for speaking freely. The assemblies of the 
Christians were calumniated ; they were charged 
with unheard-of crimes ; the faithful were put 
to the torture to force from them the avowal of 
what passed clandestinely among them. Why 
not then throw open every door ? Why not 
expose to the light the innocence of their religi- 
ous rites ? And why did they not invite the 
Pagans to come and be convinced with their 
own eyes, that they took nothing but a little 
bread and wine, as a sign of mutual fellowship, 
and a memorial of their Saviour ? Reason, 
charity, and self-interest, would have obliged 
them to do this. The secrecy then which they 
persisted in keeping is absolutely incompatible 
with the belief of the Sacrament avian. 

" In the belief of the Catholic, on the contrary, 
who does not see the propriety and even neces- 
sity of this discipline ? The exalted dogmas of 
our faith are so far above human understanding, 



CIIAI\ III] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. ] 29 

that at the first mention of them, the Pagans 
would have derided them as foolish and extra- 
vagant, and uttered against them a thousand 
insults and blasphemies. Their prejudices 
would have been strengthened against that 
religion, to which nevertheless, they were by 
degrees to be enticed. Thus on the one hand, 
the respect due to the mysteries of our Lord, 
and on the other, the regard which charity would 
suggest for the weakness of the Pagans, sufficed 
to command in the Catholic belief, a careful 
silence on such doctrines, and not to make 
them known till after a lengthened course of 
instructions preparatory to baptism. After this 
read the Fathers ; read the motives which they 
assign for the law of secrecy ; and you will 
confess that they are precisely such as I have 
just mentioned. Conformity of reasons demon- 
strates conformity of belief. We earnestly exhort 
our readers to follow up in the eighth letter this 
first general proof assigned by the author. In 
the developement of this interesting discussion, 
they will at once be convinced of the connexion 
and evident agreement between the discipline of 
the secret and the Catholic doctrine of the real 

K 



130 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX „. 

presence ; and no less evidently will they see 
its incompatibility with the figure of the Sacra- 
men tarians. 

For the rest, what to certain prejudiced minds 
might appear in the eighth letter no more than 
an inference drawn with more dexterity than 
certainty, becomes in the letter following a 
positive fact, and thus acquires a force that is 
irresistible. What indeed was concealed in part 
by the secrecy of the Christians ? That which was 
practised in their religious assemblies, and per- 
formed at the altar. And what was this ? Inter- 
rogate the liturgies ; they are ready to answer 
you. About the time of the council of Ephesus 
they are for the first time produced in open 
light ; previous to that time they had been con- 
fided to the memory of the bishops and priests ; 
for the danger of the secrets* being betrayed had 
forbidden their being committed to writing. 
But at that period, Christianity having taken 
the lead, and having nothing more to fear from 
Paganism, every church committed its liturgy 
to writing. And what is the information they 
give you ? All, without exception, present to 
us the altar, the oblation of sacrifice, the real 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 131 

presence by the change of substance, and the 
adoration. 

Nestorians, Eutychians, Jacobites, are here 
agreed both among themselves and with Catho- 
lics, all, notwithstanding schism and heresy ; in 
spite of distance and separation, in spite of the 
difference of rites, prayers and solemnities ; all 
in Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul, and Great Britain, 
as well as in Greece and its islands, in Asia 
Minor, the Indies, Egypt and Abyssinia ; all 
describe to us the same mysteries, the same 
dogmas ; all profess the same faith, and pro- 
claim the same doctrine. An agreement so 
wonderful, an uniformity so admirable could 
only proceed from one and the same cause ; 
and that cause would be sought for in vain else- 
where but in the teaching of the apostles. 
Such is the substance of the second general 
proof drawn out before us in the ninth letter. 

Its connexion with the preceding proof is t his. 
The secrecy of the Christians concealed the 
mysteries of the altar. The written liturgies 
disclose them ; they display to us the real pre- 
sence, trans ubstantiation and the adoration. 

Therefore these mysteries were really enveloped 

K 2 



132 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX n 

in the secret. The facts speak for themselves, 
and the primitive liturgies demonstrate by their 
mutual agreement, the correctness of our views 
and argumentation. But the secret is traced 
back to the apostles ; the essential part of the 
liturgy comes equally from them, and both were 
common to all the churches in the world. Here 
then are two general and certain proofs of the 
apostolicity of our doctrine on the Holy Eu- 
charist. 

This is not all : the particular proofs are 
admirably connected with those which are gene- 
ral. For in fact, what the faithful celebrated at 
the altar, what they so carefully concealed from 
the non-initiated, was made known for the first 
time to the neophytes just after their baptism, 
and before they approached to the Holy Com- 
munion. They were detained, that what till 
then had been withheld, and what they were 
soon to receive, might be explained to them. 
And what was then explained ? What dogmas, 
what doctrine did they then hear ? Was it the 
figure of the Sacramentarian, or the reality of 
the Catholic ? Let us open the catecheses ; they 
will point out the instructions which were then 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 133 

given. All these so plainly exhibit our mys- 
teries, that it would be impossible at the present 
day to express in terms more clear, precise, and 
energetic, the oblation of sacrifice, transubstan- 
tiation, and the real presence, with the adora- 
tion which it demands. Thus then we are 
assured a second time by the caiacheses, that it 
was this sublime belief which was concealed 
beneath the discipline of the secret. 

Whoever searches for it, and wishes to see it 
in the ancient Fathers, must always bear in 
mind that they spoke or wrote uniformly under 
the law of the secret; that in discourses pro- 
nounced before the uninitiated, in writings des- 
tined for the public, always in fine when there 
was danger of betraying the discipline, they 
were under the necessity of using obscure and 
ambiguous expressions : that consequently who- 
ever is desirous of forming clear and certain 
ideas of what they believed and taught on the 
Eucharist, should not depend on writings of 
this kind ; because good sense w ould dictate 
that clearness is not to be sought, where ob- 
scurity was commanded. This observation 
suffices to put to silence every objection drawn 



134 ANSWER TO THE [part H. 

from various passages of the Fathers. But 
when they addressed the faithful only, or wrote 
for them alone, then freed from restraint, they 
could speak of the mysteries without disguise ; 
they were obliged so to speak by their ministry, 
whenever they had to instruct the newly bap- 
tized. These are the discourses and writings 
which we ought in these days to consult, in 
order to become acquainted with their real 
sentiments, and their inward belief on the mys- 
teries; and in these we find openly and at 
every word our genuine doctrine on the Holy 
Eucharist." 

IIL Thus all is explained and understood, all 
is connected in these three dissertations. From 
the triple alliance of the secret, the liturgies and 
the catacheses results a complete harmony, and 
an irrefragable proof of the apostolicity of our 
doctrine on the Eucharist. The Rector, who 
appears to have felt and dreaded the force of 
this triple alliance, attempts to weaken, and, if 
possible, to break it. He separates the three 
parts, and attacks them in succession. It be- 
comes then my business to strengthen them 
one by one, and draw closer the cords which 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 135 

unite them : funiculus triplex difficile rum- 
pitur* 

IV. He begins by condemning, as I did, the 
extravagant opinion of those who date the 
origin of the secret discipline from the fourth 
century. How in fact could it be imagined, 
that the Church would undertake to deprive in 
one day all who were not Christians of the 
knowledge of mysteries universally diffused the 
day before ? How are we to suppose that 
such an undertaking could be carried into 
effect ? Mr. Faber acknowledges with me the 
folly of such a supposition : but soon after, by 
some unaccountable caprice, while he owns that 
the secret, as regarded the Pagans, was to be 
traced up to the apostles, he con lines its esta- 
blishment with respect to the catechumens, to 
the middle of the second century. What fact, 
what decree, or what monument does he produce 
in proof? None at all. In what place, by 
what order was the knowledge previously com- 
municated to the catechumens, withheld from 
them ? The Rector says not a word. He gives 
us in the outset his own conjecture, without 
* Ecdesiastes iv. v. 12. 



136 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

supporting it by a single testimonial. He 
imagines that St. Paul, full of admiration for 
the secret mysteries of the Pagans, had some 
idea of placing under a similar safeguard those 
of Christianity ; and that a hundred years after- 
wards, the Church prescribed such a law of 
secrecy with regard to the catechumens. He 
refers to certain passages of St. Paul's Epistles, 
without quoting them, which appear to him to 
prepare the way for this discipline. I have 
verified these passages ; and there is not one 
among them which can justify his conjecture. 

But it must be further observed, that the cate- 
chumens before baptism were only either Jewish 
or Pagan unbelievers, who came of their own ac- 
cord to submit to probation, and demand the in- 
structions w hich they were required to go through, 
before they could be judged worthy of baptism. 
If there had been no secret with regard to them, 
before this period, it must follow, that in the 
primitive days, the Church, forgetful of the 
precept received from her divine legislator, cast 
the precious pearls of her doctrine before swine. 
For according to the language of tradition, the 
pearls are the mysteries, and the swine designate 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 137 

the unbelievers. In tine, those who in this 
glorious century became Christians, had com- 
menced by being catechumens ; and the num- 
ber of these latter from the days of the apostles 
to the middle of the second century is incalcu- 
lable. Among so great a multitude, it is morally 
impossible that several attracted at first by 
curiosity, and even by better dispositions, should 
not have been disgusted, and abandoned the 
austere and fatiguing course of probation and 
instructions, to return to the religion of their 
Fathers. They would then have carried away 
with them into the world the knowledge of the 
mysteries ; they would have communicated it 
to their relations and friends, and to all who 
cared to be informed of it. There would in 
such case have been no longer any secret for the 
catechumens, or even for the Pagans. So far, 
Sir, are we led by the arbitrary and ill-digested 
supposition of Mr. Faber. Let us leave it then 
for what it is worth ; and consider it as never 
proposed : for what settles the question against 
the Rector in one word, is that all the ancient 
liturgies exclude the catechumens before the 
celebration of the mysteries. This rule is gene- 
ral : therefore apostolical. 



138 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



First General Proof — the Discipline of the 
Secret. 

I. I now pass on to the general proof which I 
extracted from the discipline of the secret ; not 
however that 1 ever insisted that the Eucharist 
was its sole, exclusive, or even principal object. 
The Rector makes me assert this in his book, 
though he knows that I never said it in mine : 
he repeats it to satiety, as if to shew me up to 
his readers as in error, and enjoy a victory as 
easy as imaginary. Let him exult ; I offer no 
interruption : I shall not disturb his triumph ; 
I am ambitious of one more real and substantial ; 
I will establish it upon incontestable monu- 
ments. Without producing them all, I will 
present you with several ; and if I fatigue you 
with their number, you must blame the man 
who compels me to it. You shall see the disci- 
pline of the secret in vigour, from the epoch of 
the council of Ephesus in 431, up to the days of 
the apostles. 

II. Century 5th. I begin with the celebrated 
president of the above council : these are the 
words of St. Cyril of Alexandria in his seventh 
book against J ulian . He does not notice the obj ec- 
lions of that emperor against baptism, but con- 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 139 

tents himself with saying, that "these mysteries 
" are so profound, and so exalted, that they are 
" intelligible to those only who have faith ; that 
44 therefore he shall not undertake to speak on 
" what is most admirable in them, lest by dis- 
44 covering the mysteries to the uninitiated, he 
" should offend Jesus Christ, who forbids us to 
" give what is holy to dogs, and to cast pearls 
" before swine." Observe, Sir, that according 
to this learned Patriarch, the precept of the 
secret discipline comes from Jesus Christ him- 
self: and pray bear in mind this important 
testimony, which will furnish later the solution 
of a difficulty which the Rector imagines to be 
insoluble. After saying some little of baptism, 
he adds : 44 I should say much more, if I were 
44 not afraid of being heard by the uninitiated : 
" because men generally deride what they do 
44 not understand ; and the ignorant, not even 
" knowing the weakness of their minds, despise 
44 what they ought most to venerate." 

44 It is requisite," says St. Isidore, of Pelusium, 
4t to have in the heart zeal, and the love of 
44 virtue, in order to eat worthily the true and 
44 divine passover, They fully comprehend my 



140 ANSWER TO THE [part If. 

" meaning, who following the sanction of the 
" Legislator, have been initiated in the mys- 
" teries." It was therefore by order of the 
divine Legislator that they spoke clearly of the 
mysteries only to be initiated ; and the mysteries 
of the Eucharist were comprehended in the 
number. 

Innocent first wrote thus to the Bishop De- 
centius : " 1 cannot transcribe the words (the 
" form of confirmation) for fear of appearing 
44 rather to betray, than to reply to your con- 
" sultation" .... and farther on ; 44 as to those 
44 things which it is not lawful to write, I can 
44 tell you them when you arrive." 

In the first of his three dialogues, Theo- 
doret introduces Orthoduxus speaking thus : 
44 Answer me, if you please, in mystical and 
44 obscure words ; for j^erhaps there are persons 
44 present who are not initiated in the mysteries. 
44 Eranisles — I shall understand you, and answer 
44 you with the same precaution and farther 
on, 44 You have clearly proved what you in- 
44 tended, though under mystical terms." In 
the second dialogue, Eranistes asks : 44 How do 
44 you call the gift which is offered before the 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 141 

" invocation of the priest ? We must not men- 
" tion it openly replies Orthodoxies, " because 
" we may be overheard by persons who are not 
" initiated. Therefore speak in disguised and 
" enigmatical terms ; a food made of such a 
" seed." The same Theodoret in his preface to 
Ezechiel traces up the secret discipline to the 
precept of Jesus Christ. 44 The divine mysteries 
44 are so august, that we are bound to keep them 
44 with the greatest caution : and to use the 
44 words of our Lord, these pearls ought never 
44 to be cast before swine. For indeed men 
44 finish with despising what they have obtained 
44 without difficulty." 

St. Augustin in his discourses before cate- 
chumens, or in such writings as might fall into 
their hands, never failed to conceal from them 
the mystery of the Eucharist. His ordinary 
expression was, 44 the faithful know it" In his 
fourth sermon on Jacob and Esau, speaking of 
this mystery, he does not venture to call it the 
sacrament of the body and blood of Jesus 
Christ, but only 44 the sacrament known to the 
44 faithful, made from corn and wine." In his 
epistle to the catechumen Honoratus, he says, 



142 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

" We render thanksgiving to the Lord our God 
" in the great sacrament, in the sacrifice of the 
" new law : when once you have been baptized, 
" you will know where, when, and how it is 
" offered." Speaking of the manna in the 12th 
treatise on St. John, "We know what the 
" Jews received ; and the catechumens do not 
" know what the Christians receive." And in 
the preceding treatise : " Ask a catechumen if 
" he eats the flesh of the Son of man, and drinks 
" his blood ; he does not know what you mean ; 
" . . . . the catechumens do not know what the 
" Christians receive .... the manner in which 
" the flesh of our Lord is received, is a thing 
" concealed from them." " What is there hid- 
" den from the public in the church ?" he says 
in his first discourse on the 103d psalm, " The 
" sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. The 
" Pagans see our good works, but not the sacra- 
" ments. But it is precisely from those things 
" which are concealed from their sight, that 
" those spring which cause their admiration." 
And in the 10th sermon on St. John, " Those 
who know the scriptures understand perfectly 
" what Melchisedech offered to Abraham ; we 



chap, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 143 

" must not here make mention of it, because of 
" the catechumens : nevertheless the faithful are 
" acquainted with it." 

111. Fourth century. — St. Chrysostom takes 
occasion from baptism to express himself as 
follows on the secrecy of the mysteries in general : 
Homil. 40 on 1 Corinth. " I wish to speak 
" openly, but 1 dare not, on account of those 
" who are not initiated. These persons render 
" explanation more difficult for us, by obliging 
" us either to speak in obscure terms, or to 
" unveil the things which are secret : yet I shall 
" endeavour, as far as possible, to explain myself 
" in disguised terms." " Take care not to give 
" that which is holy to dogs, and to cast pearls 
" before swine," says he in his first book on 
compunction of heart . He takes occasion from 
this divine precept to declaim against the abuses 
of granting baptism to catechumens not pro- 
perly disposed, and admitting to the holy table 
impure and corrupt Christians. In the letter in 
which he informs the Sovereign Pontiff Inno- 
cent the First of the tumult excited against him 
in his church, he relates that the seditious persons, 
among whom were many of the uninitiated, forced 



144 ANSWER TO THE [ PART H . 

a passage to the place where the sacred things 
were deposited: that they saw every thing there, 
and that the most holy blood of Jesus Christ was 
spilt upon their garments. Palladius giving an 
account of the same sedition in his life of St. 
Chrysostom, says only that the symbols were 
spilt. You see here the difference of expression : 
the Patriarch uses no circumlocution in a confi- 
dential letter to the head of the Church ; but 
Palladius speaks with reserve, and in disguised 
terms in a history intended for the public. For 
the sake of brevity, I will repeat to you the 
words of your learned Casaubon. " Is there 
" any one so much a stranger to the reading of 
" the Fathers, as to be ignorant of the usual form 
" of expression, which they adopt when speak* 
" ing of the sacraments, the initiated know what 
" / mean ? It occurs at least fifty times in the 
" writings of Chrysostom alone, and as often in 
" those of Augustin." 

" I am ashamed," said St. Gregory of Nyssa, 
to an aged catechumen, " to see that after having 
" grown old in probation, you still suffer your- 
" self to be sent out with the catechumens, like 
" a little weak boy who does not know how to 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM, 145 

" take care of what is entrusted to him ; join 
" yourself to the mystic people, and become at 
" length acquainted with our secret dogmas." 

St. Gregory Nazianzen says that the greater 
part of our mysteries ought not to be exposed 
to strangers ; and further, that " we ought 
" rather to shed our blood than publish them." 
Orat. 42, et35. 

" We receive," said St. Basil, " the dogmas 
u transmitted to us by writing, and those which 
" have descended to us from the apostles, be- 
" neath the veil and mystery of oral tradition — 
" the words of invocation in the consecration of 
" the bread, and of the Eucharistic chalice ; 
" which of the saints have left us them in wri- 
" ting ? The apostles and fathers, who pre- 
" scribed from the beginning certain rites to the 
" Church, knew how to preserve the dignity of 
" the mysteries by the secrecy and silence in 
" which they enveloped them. For what is 
u open to the ear and the eye can no longer be 
" mysterious For this reason several things 
" have been handed down to us without writing, 
" lest the vulgar, too familiar with our dogmas, 
" should pass from being accustomed to them, 

L 



146 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" to the contempt of them. A dogma is very 

" different from a sermon Beautiful and 

" admirable discipline ! For how could it be 
" proper to write or circulate among the public 
" what the uninitiated are forbidden to contem- 
" plate V y (On the Holy Ghost, c. 27.) 

Listen to the synod of Alexandria, speaking 
of the Eusebians, enemies of St. Athanasius, in 
340. *- They are not ashamed to celebrate the 
" mysteries before the catechumens, and perhaps 
" even before the Pagans ; forgetting that it is 
" written, that we should hide the mystery of the 
" King ; and in contempt of the precept of our 
" Lord, that we must not place holy things 
" before dogs, nor pearls before swine. For it 
" is not lawful to shew the mysteries openly to 
" the uninitiated ; lest through ignorance they 
" scoff at them, and the catechumens be scan- 
" dalized through indiscreet curiosity." * 

St. Epiphanius (Anchor. No. 37) wishing to 
prove that the allegories of Origen were to be 

* These motives were no less strong in the first century, in 
which the Rector gratuitously conjectures that the mysteries 
were open to the catechumens. The synod was accountable to 
all the Bishops for the catholicity of its condemnation of the 
Eusebians. 



CHAP. I II, J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 147 

rejected, and that we must believe things with- 
out always seeing the reason for them, quotes 
the Eucharist as an example. " We see that our 
" Lord took a thing into his hands, as we read in 
" the gospel, that he rose from table, that he 
" resumed the things, and having given thanks, 
" he said, this is this of mine. Hoc meum est 
" hoc." This singular turn of expression and 
reservation conveyed no meaning to those who 
are uninitiated. But ought it not to speak very 
loudly to Mr. Faber ? What think yon, Sir ? 
Does it favour the opinion of a figurative pre- 
sence ? And do you not at first sight penetrate 
the meaning of the enigma ? 

St Jerome replying to Evagrius, who had 
consulted him on an obscure passage of the 
apostle touching the sacrifice of Melchisedech, 
says ; " You are not to suppose that St. Paul 
w could not easily have explained himself ; 
" but the time was not come for such explana- 
" tion : he sought to persuade the Jews, and not 
" the faithful, to whom the mystery might have 
" been delivered without reserve." 

St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, expresses himself as 

follows, (Catech. 6, No. 29) — " We do not speak 

l 2 



148 ANSWER TO THE [ PART n . 

" clearly before the catechumens on the mys- 
" teries, but are obliged often to use obscure 
" expressions, in order that while we are under- 
" stood by the faithful who are instructed, those 
" who are not so may not sutler injury." And 
in Catech. 18, No. 32, 33, " at the approach of 
" the holy festival of Easter; .... you shall be 
" instructed, with God's grace, in all that it is 
" proper for you to know ; with what devotion, 
" and in what order you are to enter the laver 
" of regeneration, , . . . with what reverence you 
" must proceed from baptism to the holy altar 
" of God, to taste the spiritual and heavenly 
" mysteries which are there dispensed .... after 
" the holy and salutary day of Easter, . • . , you 
" shall hear, if it please God, other catechetical 
" instructions .... and on the mysteries of the 
" New Testament which are celebrated upon the 
" altar, and had their beginning in this city : all 
" that is taught of them by the Divine Scriptures, 
" as also what is their force and power ; in fine, 
" how you are to approach to them ; and when, 
" and how they are to be celebrated." Nothing 
marks more forcibly the importance of the 
secret, than the notice placed by St. Cyril at the 



CHAP. Hi] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 149 

end of the preface at the head of his catecheses ; 
the last live of which disclose the mysteries of 
Baptism, Confirmation, and the Eucharist. It 
is as follows : " Give these catecheses, made for 
" their instruction, to be read by those who 
44 approach to baptism, and by the faithful who 
44 have already received it. But as for the cate- 
" chumens, and those who are not Christians, 
44 take care not to communicate them to such. 
" Otherwise take notice, you will be accountable 
" to God. If you transcribe a copy of them, do 
" it I conjure you, as in the presence of the 
44 Lord." 

St. Gaudentius, Bishop of Brescia, contem- 
porary with St. Cyril, speaking to the neophytes 
on their return from baptism, said to them, " In 
64 the lesson which you have just heard from 
14 Exodus, I shall choose such parts as cannot be 
44 explained in presence of catechumens, but 
" which it is necessary to disclose to neophytes." 
In another place he proclaims, 44 that the splendid 
44 night of Easter requires him to conform less to 
44 the order of the text, than to the wants of the 
44 occasion ; so that the neophytes may learn 
" the established rule for eating the paschal 



150 ANSWER TO THE [part Ii 

" sacrifice, and the faithful who are instructed 
" may recognise it." (Treatise 5 on Exodus.) 

St. Ambrose, in his book on the mysteries, 
c. 1, n. 2, says — 14 The time admonishes us to 
" treat of the mysteries, and to explain the 
" meaning* of the sacraments. If before your 
44 baptism and initiation we had thought of 
" speaking to you on these subjects, we should 
44 have appeared rather to betray than explain 
" them." 

44 It is not given to all to contemplate the 
44 depth of our mysteries. Our Levites exclude 
44 from them at first, that they may not be seen 
44 by those who ought not to behold them, nor 
44 received by those who cannot preserve them." 
In his book, De Officiis, 44 Every mystery should 
44 remain concealed, and covered by faithful 
44 silence, lest it should be rashly divulged to 
44 profane ears. " And upon this verse of 
psalm 118, I have hidden thy words in my soul, 
that I may not sin against thee : 44 he sins against 
44 God, who divulges to the unworthy, the mys- 
44 teries confided to him. The danger is not 
4 only of telling falsehoods, but also of truths, if 
" persons allow themselves to give hints of them 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 151 

" to those, from whom they ought to be con- 
" cealed." And he opposes such indiscretion 
by the words of our Saviour : 44 Beware of cast- 
44 itig pearls before unclean animals." 

IV. Third century. — Zeno, Bishop of Verona, 
in a discourse on continence, exhorts the Chris- 
tian woman not to marry an infidel, for fear she 
might betray to him the law of secrecy, ne sis 
proditrix legis. And he adds, 44 Know you not 
44 that the sacrifice of the unbeliever is public, 
44 but yours secret ? That any one may freely 
44 approach to his, while even for Christians, if 
44 they are not consecrated, it would be a sacri- 
44 lege to contemplate yours ?" In a discourse 
on the 126th psalm, we read these words. — 
44 Custom has given the name of the house of 
44 God, or temple, to the place of our assemblies, 
44 which are surrounded with walls, in order to 
44 secure the secret celebration of our sacraments. " 

St. Cyprian thus begins his book against the 
proconsul of Africa : 44 Till now I had despised 
44 the impieties and sacrileges which thy mouth 
44 discharged incessantly against the only true 
44 God he adds, that if he had been silent, it 
was not without the command of his Divine 



152 ANSWER TO THE [ PA1lx „ 

Master, 44 who forbids us to give that which is 
" holy to dogs, and to cast pearls before swine." 
He contents himself with establishing the unity 
of God, without saying a word on the Trinity, or 
the sacraments of the Church. 

Origen, in his 13th homily on Exodus, pre- 
paring to treat of the mystery of the Eucharist, 
says : " I am afraid and doubt much if I shall 
"find suitable hearers, and that I shall be de- 
" mancled an account of the pearls of the Lord ; 
44 where, how , and before whom I have produced 
44 them." And in a homily on Leviticus, 44 Do 
44 not stop at flesh and blood, (the lambs and 
44 goats spoken of by Moses) but learn rather to 
44 discern the blood of the Word ; hear what he 
44 himself says : This is my blood which shall be 
44 shed for you. Whoever is instructed in the 
44 mysteries knows the flesh and the blood of the 
44 Word of God. Let us not dwell on the sub- 
44 ject, which is known to the initiated, and 
44 which the uninitiated ought not to know." 

The very ancient author of the Apostolic Con- 
stitutions, book 3, ch. 5, admonishes, 44 that in 
- ; speaking of mystic things, care must be taken 
44 not to be indiscreet, and to express oneself 



CHAP, ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 153 

" prudently, bearing in mind the words of our 
" Saviour, 'do not cast pearls before swine, lest 
" they trample them under foot/ " 

St. Clement of Alexandria, in the 1st book 
of his Stromata, says — " I pass over intentionally 
" several things, fearing to commit to writing 
" what I took great care not to say, lest those 
" who read these writings should take my words 
" in an improper sense, and we should be ac- 
61 cused, as the proverb says, of putting a sword 
" into the hands of a child. There are certain 
" things which the scripture will shew me, 
" though they are not there openly expressed. . 
" there are some which it will only touch upon ; 
" but it will endeavour to say them under a veil, 
" to disclose them while it conceals them, and to 
" shew them while it is silent/ 5 

Tertullian seeking to deter his wife from 
marrying an infidel if she should survive him, 
says to her among other reasons : " You would 
" thereby fall into this fault, that the pagans 
4i would come to the knowledge of our mys- 

" teries Will not your husband know 

" what you taste in secret, before any other 
" food ; and if he perceives bread, will he not 



154 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



" imagine that it is that so much spoken of ?" 
Therefore secrecy covered the mysteries of the 
Eucharist. 

In the liturgy called that of the apostles, and 
later of St. John Chrysostom, the priest and 
deacon bowing down, and each holding a part 
of the sacred host, make together an admirable 
confession, which begins thus : " I believe O 
" Lord, and confess that thou art the Christ, the 
" Son of the living God, who didst come into the 
" world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief ; 
" let me partake of thy mystical supper. I will 
" not reveal the mystery to thine enemies." — 
Therefore the Eucharistic mysteries were covered 
by secrecy.* 

The author of the Recognitions, which are 
very ancient, since they were translated by 
Rufinus in the fourth century, proves as follows, 
the difficulty of preaching before a multitude : 

* This liturgy is still followed by all the Greeks, who are 
in the West, at Rome, iu Calabria and Apulia, by the Georgians, 
the Bulgarians, the Russians, and Muscovites; by all the 
Christians, the modern Melchites under the patriarch of 
Alexander, resident at Cairo, under the patriarchs of Jerusalem 
and of Antioch, resident at Damascus. — See P. le Brun Cere- 
monies of (he Mass, T. 4, in Svo. 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 155 

" For what is, cannot be said to all as it is,* on 
" account of those who give a captious and ma- 
44 lignant ear. What then will he do who imparts 
44 the word to a crowd of people unknown P Will 
44 he conceal the truth ? But how then can he 
44 instruct those who are deserving ? If however 
44 he exhibits the clear truth before those who 
44 are indifferent about salvation, he is wanting 
44 to him, by whom he is sent, and from whom 
44 he has received orders not to cast the pearls of 
44 doctrine before swine and dogs, who would be 
44 furious against it by arguments and sophisms, 
44 envelop it in the mire of their sordid and 
44 carnal understanding, and by their barking 
44 and disgusting replies would tear and fatigue 
44 the preachers of God." 

V. Second and first centuries, — The secrecy 
of the first Christians on the Eucharistic dogmas 
is demonstrated from the unworthy calumnies 
spread and believed in the pagan world against 
their assemblies ; by the punishments employed 
to extort from the Christians an avowal of what 
they practised, and by the origin of these 



* Book 30. 



156 ANSWER TO THE j> ARX „. 

calumnies and cruelties which dates from the 
first century. 

Tertullian, in his Apology, exclaims when 
repelling the accusations of infanticide and im- 
purities ; " Who are those who have made known 
" to the world these pretended crimes ? are they 
those who are accused ? But how could it be 
" so, since it is the common law of all mysteries 
" to keep them secret P If they themselves made 
" no discovery, it must have been made by 
" strangers. But how could they have had any 
** knowledge of them, since the profane are ex- 
" eluded from the sight of the most holy mysteries, 
" and those are carefully selected who are per- 
** mitted to be spectators }" The Pagans then 
were ignorant of what passed in the assemblies 
of the Christians ; and this ignorance evidently 
pre-supposes the secrecy preserved by the faith- 
ful. The object of this secrecy was the Eucha- 
ristic bread; the mysteries of the altar. For 
these alone could have given rise to the calum- 
nies, while at the same time the sight of them 
was forbidden to the profane, and permitted 
solely to chosen spectators. These reports indi- 
cate manifestly the sacrament of the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ. 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ItOMANISM. 157 

Let us hear the Pagan Cecilius, in the curious 
and interesting dialogue of Minutius Felix, 
which I recommend you to read : " Shall we 
" allow men of an infamous and desperate fac- 
" tion to attack the Gods with impunity ; and 
" gathering together an ignorant rabble and 
44 credulous women, instruct them for a profane 
tfi society, not to say a conspiracy, which is not 
44 done by any holy ceremony, but by sacrileges, 
" nocturnal assemblies, solemn fasts and horrible 
" meats : people who love darkness and fly from 
" the light ; who say nothing in public, and 
" talk incessantly when assembled together — 
" this evil sect increases every day ; wherefore 
" we must endeavour to extirpate this execrable 
44 society. They know one another by certain 
" secret signs, and love one another almost be- 
" fore they are acquainted. Lust forms a part 
44 of their religion : they commonly call them- 
44 selves brothers and sisters, to make simple for- 
44 nication become incest by this sacred name ; 
44 so much do these wretched people indulge in 
44 crimes. Certainly if there were not such 
44 crimes among them, there would not be so 
44 loud a cry against them. The ceremony which 



158 ANSWER TO THE [PART 11. 

" they observe, when they admit any one to their 
" mysteries, is not less horrible because it is 
" public. They place before the new comer an 
" infant covered with paste, in order to conceal 
" the murder which they will have him commit. 
" At their bidding, he gives it several stabs with 
" a knife. The blood runs on all sides ; they 
" eagerly suck it up ; and the common crime is 
" the common pledge of silence and secrecy. 
" Their banquets are also known ; and our Cir- 
" tensis makes mention of them in his harangue. 
" They all assemble on a solemn day, men, 
" women, children, brothers and sisters of all 
" ages and both sexes ; and after having well 
" eaten and drunk, as the heat of the wine and 
" the meats begins to provoke them to lust, they 
" throw something to a dog, who is tied to a 
" chandelier, and throw it so far that he cannot 
" reach it, on purpose that in springing forward 
" he may overturn the lights. Thus having got 
44 rid of the sole witness of their crimes, they are 
44 guilty of promiscous intercourse ; and by this 
44 means are all incestuous in will, if not in 
44 effect, since the sin of each one is the wish of 
44 the whole company. I pass over many things 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 159 

" designedly ; and indeed here are already too 
" many. And truly the darkness, which they 
" seek for their mysteries, are sufficiently evident 
" proof of all we say, or at least the greater part 
" of it. For why conceal all that they adore ? 
" We are not afraid to publish what is proper : 
" crimes only demand secrecy and silence. " 

Mr. Faber could have no motive to make him 
afraid of communicating openly to Cecilius his 
opinion of a figurative manducation, of a moral 
change in the substance of the bread, of the real 
absence of Jesus Christ. The Christian Octavius 
has no such replies to make He does not dis- 
close what is believed, nor what is done : he 
contents himself with repelling the infamous 
calumnies. " I would now," he replies, " ad- 
u dress myself to those who say, or who believe 
" that the murder of an infant is the ceremony 
" of introduction to our mysteries. Do you 
" then think it possible that a poor infant, a 
" little body so tender is destined to die beneath 
" our violence ; and that we shed the blood of a 
" being newly born, as yet of imperfect form, 
44 and scarcely a human being ? Let those be- 
44 lieve it, who could be cruel enough to perpe- 



160 ANSWER TO THE [part ft, 

44 trate it. You indeed expose your children to 
" savage beasts, and birds, as soon as they are 
44 born, you strangle and suffocate them : there 
" are even some who by cruel potions murder 
44 them in their wombs, and kill them before 
44 they see light. This you have learned from 
44 your Gods. . . • Nor are those far removed 
44 from such a crime, who feed on savage beasts 
44 just come out of the amphitheatre, all bloody 
44 and full of those whom they have just de- 
" voured. As for us, we are not allowed to see 
44 murders, nor to hear them ; and blood so fills 
44 us with horror, that we do not even eat that of 
44 animals. As to the incestuous banquet, it is 
44 a calumny invented by the devils to sully the 
44 glory of our chastity, and deter men from our 
44 religion by the horror of so great a crime. 
44 What your orator Cirtensis has said is rather 
44 an injurious accusation than a testimony. 
44 And truly you are far more guilty of incest 
44 than we .... and thus you accuse us of 
44 false incestuous actions, while you have little 
44 remorse in committing real ones. But the 
44 Christians do not place chastity only in the 
" exterior; they place it in the mind, and do 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 161 

" not so much study to appear chaste as to be 
" so in reality: .... and if we are chaste in our 
" assemblies, we are no less so in all other places. 
" Many preserve the holiness of celibacy even 
" until death, without any boasting : and so far 
" are we from incest, that* some are ashamed 
" even of lawful pleasures." 

" If our accusers are asked," said Athenagoras, 
" if they have seen what they assert, there will 
" none be found impudent enough to say that 
" they have. How can they accuse those of 
' killing and eating human beings, who, it is 
6 well known, cannot bear the sight of a man 
4 put to death even justly ? Men like us, who 
' have renounced the spectacles of gladiators 
' and wild beasts, believing that there is little 
• difference between seeing a murder and com- 
4 mitting one ?" 

" Those," said St. Justin* who accuse us of 
' these crimes, commit them themselves, and 
' attribute them to their Gods. For our part, 
' as we have no share in them, we do not dis- 
■ tress ourselves, having God for the witness of 

* Second apology addressed to M. Aureltus iti 16(5, 
M 



162 ANSWER TO THE [part II 

" our actions, and thoughts .... We entreat 
" you that this request may be made public. . . . 
" that it may be known what we are, and we 
" may be delivered from these false suspicions, 
" which expose us to punishment. It is not 
" known that we condemn these infamous deeds 
" which they proclaim against us, and that for 
" this very reason we have renounced those Gods 
" who have committed such crimes, and require 
" such. If you command it, we will expose our 
" maxims to the world, that, if possible, it may 
" be converted." Observe, he does not say, we 
will expose our mysteries to the world. 

VI. Punishments employed to extort from the 
Christians the secret of what passed in their assem- 
blies. Eusebius has preserved for us the ad- 
mirable letter which the churches of Lyons and 
Vienne wrote to those of Asia and Phrygia, on 
the persecution which they had just suffered in 
Gaul. We find in it the following passages. 
" They took some of our servants, who were 
" pagans, and being filled with the spirit of the 
" devil, and apprehensive of the torments which 
" they had seen the faithful suffer, deposed 
44 falsely, through the violence of the soldiers, 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 

" that we made feasts like Thyestes, that we 

" indulged in the pleasures of CEdipus, that we 

" committed abominations which it is not lawful 

" to think or speak of ; and of which we cannot 

" believe that any one ever would have been 

" guilty. When these black calumnies were 

" spread among the public, every one rose up 

" with such fury against us, that our neighbours, 

" who had previously treated us with some 

" moderation, became the most enraged .... 

" The number and cruelty of the torments, which 

" the holy martyrs suffered are beyond all that 

" we can express .... This happy woman (the 

" heroic servant Blandina) felt new strength as 

" often as she renewed her profession of faith, 

" and found relief and pleasure in repeating — 

" ' I am a Christian, and no evil is committed 

" £ among us/ Sanctus also supported the tor- 

" ments with a constancy more than human ; 

" and when in the midst of the most cruel punish- 

" ments, the impious wretches interrogated him 

" in the hope of extorting from him by the vio- 

" lence of pain some word unworthy of him, in- 

" stead of replying to their questions .... he 

" answered nothing else, but '! am a Christiaii 5 . . 

m 2 



164 ANSWER TO THE [ PAR7 n . 

4t - The devil, who thought he had overcome Bib- 
" liada, because she had renounced the faith like 
" certain others, was desirous of crowning her 
oi condemnation by calumny ; and caused her 
44 to be tormented afresh, in order that, weakened 
44 as she was by her fall, she might depose against 
44 us. But this violence served only to rouse 
44 her from her profound lethargy. The punish- 
44 ments which the executioners exercised upon 
44 her, made her remember the lire of hell, and 
44 she said to them — • How should the Christians 
44 devour infants, when they are not even permitted 
" to eat the blood of beasts F She then confessed 
" that she was a Christian, and was numbered 
44 with the martyrs .... Those who had re- 

44 flounced the faith were shut up in prisons, as 
44 well as those who had confessed it : so far 
64 from deriving any benefit from their apostacy, 
44 thev were arrested as criminals and murderers, 
44 and tormented more cruelly than the others . . 
44 They were moreover despised by the pagans as 
44 cowards who had renounced the glorious cha- 
44 racter of Christians to become their own ac- 
44 cusers of murder ...... Attains having been 

u place* I upon the iron chair and burnt, said to 



CHAP, ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



165 



" the people in Latin, pointing to the intolerable 
" smoke which rose from his body, 4 it is truly 
" emting men to do as you do : but for our part, 
" we do not eat them, nor commit any other 
" crime.'"* 

* Besides this letter written by witnesses who had still 
before their eyes the bloody but glorious tragedy, I had quoted 
a short fragment from St. Irenaeus, preserved by CEcumenius, 
an author of the tenth century. Mr. Faber attaches himself 
exclusively to this fragment, and for reasons best known to 
himself, says not a word on the original letter of the churches 
of Lyons and Vienne. f here subjoin the ancient Latin version 
of the fragment, that by comparing it with that of the Rector, a 
judgment may be formed of his rare talent for translation, and 
his extreme exactness even in the smallest things. It is as 
follows: "Cum Grsepi servos horum Christianorum in divinis 
mysteriis edoctorum apprehendissent, deinde vim inferrent, ut 
videlicet arcanum quidpiam ab his de Christianis discerent ; 
cum hi servi n*Mi habereut quomodo vim inferentibus ad delec- 
tationem et gratiam loquerentur, praeterquam quod a dominis 
audierant divinarn participationem esse sanguinem et corpus 
Christ! ; existi mantes ipsi quod vere sanguis et caro esset, hoc 
responderuut inquirentibus. Illi vero id sumentes tanquam 
relpsa hoc perageretur a Chribtianis, id aliis quoque manifesta- 
bant Graecis; et martyres Sanctum et Blandinam tormentis id 
fateri cogebant. Quibus libere et scile Blandina locuta est, 
dicens : quomodo hoc ferrent, qui ob divinum studium et 
meditationem ne concessis quidem carnibus vescuntur?" 

The fragment and letter both speak of the same persecu- 
tion ; the letter names in detail several martyrs; the fragment 
only Sanctus and Blandina. The information in both comes 
from servants,; the inculpations are for a similar crime; here 



166 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



In the second apology which St. Justin ad- 
dressed in 166 to Marcus Aurelius, I read as 
follows : " But kill yourselves then, all of you, 
44 you will say ; and you will thus find God, 

it is human blood, human iiesh ; and there, feasts like that of 
Thyestes. The answers breathe the same sentimeus, and the 
like horror. " How should they do what you say," says 
Blandina, 66 who through piety and having God before their 
u eyes, abstain even from lawful meats ?" " How," exclaimed 
Bibliada, " how should the Christians devour infants, when 
" they are not even permitted to eat the blood of beasts ? And 
Attalus: u for our part, we do not eat men, nor commit any 
" other crime." 

Now let us come to the translation : Existi mantes ipsi (not 
the Greeks, but the servants) quod vere sanguis et caro esset, 
says the Latin version. The tormentors^ says Mr. Faber, 
fancying that it was literal blood and Jlesh, (literal blood, literal 
flesh, literal body occur incessantly in his book : we can say 
with propriety that any word is taken to the letter, or literally ; 
we speak of a literal explication ; but who ever heard of a literal 
foot, a literal hand, heart of literal blood or flesh ? I know of 
no language which admits of such an expression. But let us 
pass on to the other words,) quibus libere ac scite Blandina 
locuta est; Blandina readily and boldly answered — boldly is 
not the meaning of scite. What St. Irenaeus admires in the 
answer is not the boldness, but the prudence, the wisdom which 
while it repels the accusation, takes care not to disclose the 
secret. Ask your Rector what scite means ; press him to give 
you its real sense: he will not be able to give it; for, to adopt 
his style, if the Christians at that time eat only literal bread, 
and drank only literal wine, Blandina ought to have so declared 
without disguise ; and in not doing so, she would have replied, 
non scite sed stolide. 



chap, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 167 

" without troubling us with your persons any 
" longer." St. Justin tells them in reply, that the 
faith which the Christians have in Providence 
does not permit them so to do ; and he adds that 
to justify the calumnies propagated against the 
Christians, they put to the torture slaves, chil- 
dren, and women ; they made them suffer 
horrible torments to extort from them a con- 
fession of the incests and banquets of human 
flesh, of which the Christians were accused. 
" They who accuse us of these crimes, commit 
" them themselves, and attribute them to their 
" Gods. For our part, as we have no share in 
" such horrid crimes, we do not give way to 
" uneasiness, having God to witness all our 
" thoughts and actions." 

Pliny the younger, governor of Bithynia, 
giving an account of the Christians to Trajan, 
occasioned by the reports which had gone abroad 
against them, says that he had determined to 
take proper measures for ascertaining the truth. 
" This made me consider it the more necessary 
" to extort the truth by the force of torments 
" from the female slaves, who were said to 
" belong to the ministry of their worship : but 



168 ANSWER TO Till? ! PART 1.1. 

" I discovered nothing except a bad superstition 
44 carried to excess." 

VII. These calumnies and cruelties take their 
origin from the first century. Celsus, who 
writing with grey hairs in the first years of 
Adrian, must have been born between the years 
70 and 80 at the latest, begins with the reproach 
of clandestine practices, which he often repeats 
against the assemblies of the Christians. Origen 
replies that the doctrine of the Christians w as 
better known than that of the philosophers. 
" It is true nevertheless," he adds, 44 that there 
44 are certain points not communicated to every 
44 one : but this is so far from being peculiar to 
44 the Christians, that it was observed among the 
44 philosophers, as well as ourselves. . . . Celsus 
44 therefore attempts in vain the decry the seeret 
44 kept by the Christians, since he does not even 
44 know in what it consists.* One would think 
44 that Celsus sought to imitate the Jews, who 
44 when the gospel began to be preached, disse- 
4 minated false reports against those who had 
4 embraced it : that the Christians sacrificed a 



* Grig. Book 1, No. 7— Edit. Bened. T. 1. 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 169 

" little child, and eat its flesh together ; that to 
44 do works of darkness, they extinguished the 
" lights, and then abandoned themselves to 
" impurity indiscriminately."* 

" For my part," says St. Justin, "when I, 
" who am a disciple of Plato, heard the Christians 
" denounced in so unworthy a manner, and saw 
" them walking with such intrepidity to death, 
" and to all that was terrible ; no, said I to 
" myself, it is impossible that such men should 
" live in the depravity of vice, and the pursuit 
" of infamous pleasures. Is there in fact a man 
44 so enslaved to voluptuous gratifications, or of 
44 such outrageous intemperance as to find su- 
" preme luxury in a banquet of human flesh ; 
" and who at the same time will run gaily to 
" punishments, and throw himself into the arms 
" of death, to deprive himself voluntarily of 
" wliat he loves ?" 

From the testimony of Eusebius, Saturninus 
and Basilides sprung from Menander, who him- 
self sprung from Simon. 44 The devil," he adds, 
44 who has no pleasure but in evil, made use of 



* lbid 5 Book 6, No. 28. 



170 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" these monsters .... to give occasion to the 
" infidels to cry down our religion .... Thence 
" came those black calumnies that the Christians 
44 committed incests with their mothers and 
" sisters, and eat abominable meats."* 

44 We are traduced," exclaimed Tertullian,-|* 
" as the most wicked of men, bound to each 
" other by an oath of infanticide, guilty of 
" regaling ourselves upon the flesh of the infant 
" which we have just slain ; and afterwards 
44 abandoning ourselves to incest, after the dogs 
44 who are accomplices in our debauchery have 
44 procured for us, by overturning the lamps, the 
44 protection of darkness, and the effrontery of 
44 crime .... The imputation of these works is 
44 dated, as 1 have said, from the reign ofTiberius. 
44 Hatred of the truth began with it ; it was 
44 detested as soon as produced to the world." 

Finally, we learn from Tacitus, speaking of 
the burning of Rome, that Nero accused people 
of it who were odious by their crimes, and called 
Christians .... u They first apprehended those 
44 who confessed ; afterwards a great multitude 

* Eus. Hist. Eccl. Book 4, chap. 7. 
+ JpoL ch. 7. 



CHAP. I n. J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 171 

" were convicted upon their information, not 
" so much of the burning of Rome, as of hatred 
" of the human race."* He afterwards speaks 
of them as criminals deserving of death. Could 
we conceive that a society of men so pure and 
perfect could have been devoted to the hatred of 
mankind, if we were not informed by Eusebius 
and Tertullian of the abominable calumnies 
which the emissaries of the Jews had spread 
abroad against them as early as the reign of 
Tiberius ? 

VIII. If Sir, you have paid attention to the 
passages from the Fathers, which I have now 
laid before you relative to the affecting and 
admirable discipline of the secret, you can no 
longer entertain a doubt on either of the follow- 
ing points — 1st. That the origin of this disci- 
pline is to be dated as early as the preaching of 
the gospel, and that it was in vigour in all the 
churches during the first four centuries — 2dly, 
that the Eucharistic dogmas were concealed be- 
neath the secrecy observed during this long 
period. 



* Annul. Book 15. 



172 ANSWER TO THE [part 11. 

1. Ill fact, either we must attribute the disci- 
pline of secrecy to apostolic institution, or say 
that the Church, after having delivered the mys- 
teries to the public during a century, more or 
less, decided all at once upon depriving them of 
the knowledge of these mysteries. To impute 
to her such a decision, would be to charge her 
with a conduct most absurd and extravagant ; 
or rather to accuse ourselves of absurdity, and 
lie open to just reproach. The secret so reli- 
giously observed in the fourth century demon- 
strates by the very fact, that it must necessarily 
have been so observed up to the days of the 
apostles.* Positive proof of this is furnished 
by the testimonies which have just passed in 
review before us. You must have remarked that 
the greater number of the Fathers, whose words 
1 have cited, many more of which 1 could have 
produced, trace the discipline of secrecy up to 
the precept of Jesus Christ : " take care not to 
" cast pearls before swine. " We have seen 
moreover that the atrocious calumnies spread 
abroad against the Christians arose from the 

* You will find the proof of this fully developed in the 1st 
vol. of the Discussion Amicale, p. 350, et seq. 



CHAPi III] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 173 

privacy of their assemblies, and the inviolable 
secrecy as to what was done in them ; and we 
learnt at the same time that these calumnies 
began even in the reign of Tiberius. In fine, it 
is here that the solidly true axiom of St. An- 
gus tin becomes applicable : " Whatever the 
" universal Church holds, and has always held, 
" without its having been established by any 
" council, is to be justly considered to have come 
" down from apostolical tradition." We know 
of no council which established the discipline of 
secrecy ; and we are sure that it was observed in 
all the churches in Christendom. Our witnesses 
are — for Rome and the whole of Italy, Julius 
the First and Innocent the First— for the Milanese, 
Ambrose — for Aquilica, Rufinus — for Dalmatia, 
Jerom — for Brescia, Gaudentius — for Verona, 
Zeno — for Carthage, Tertullian and Cyprian — 
for Hippo and all Africa, the great Aug us tin — 
for Alexandria, Clement and his disciple Origen, 
and the patriarchs Athanasius and Cyril, and 
the synod of that famous metropolis in its ency- 
clical letter to all the bishops of the world — - 
for Jerusalem and Palestine, the celebrated cate- 
chist Cyril — for Cyprus and the islands of the 



174 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX II# 

Archipelago Epiphanius — for the country about 
the Euphrates, Theodoret — for Antioch, the 
queen of oriental cities, Chrysostom — for the 
towns of Nyssa and Nazianzum, the two G re- 
go ries — for Cappadocia and Pont us, Basil — for 
Helenopolis, Palladins and Sozomen — for Con- 
stantinople, Isidore of Pelusium. 

In a word, if the discipline of secrecy had 
been disregarded in one single church of conse- 
quence, it soon must have ceased every where 
else. Suppose that at the end of the first cen- 
tury, some one of the churches founded by the 
apostles had not conformed to this discipline : 
what would have been the result ? The mys- 
teries would have been divulged from one to 
another by persons travelling from that diocese 
in the neighbouring countries, and in a short 
time the secret would have been published 
every where. Put these various considerations 
together, and you will agree with me that the 
apostolicity and universality of the discipline of 
secrecy are of the number of facts the best at- 
tested in history. 

2. It is no less certain that the dogmas of the 
Eucharist were concealed beneath the secret. 



CHAP ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 175 

Mr. Faber would maintain the contrary. He 
must forgive me if I prefer the testimonies of 
contemporary Fathers to his views and opinions. 
You have read them ; almost all declare it in 
terms so positive, that it is impossible to be 
mistaken. They even go so far as to name 
among the mysteries concealed from the pro- 
fane, the Eucharist, the Christian Passover, the 
sacrifice of bread and wine, prefigured by that 
of Melchisedech. And in fact, what could be 
the object of the infamous calumnies spread 
against our brethren from the birth of Chris- 
tianity, but the Eucharistic mysteries ? To 
what could they allude by their tales of infants 
murdered, their flesh served up as meat, and 
their blood as drink — of banquets of Thyestes, 
&c. if not to the dogma of the real presence, to 
the manducation of the body of Jesus Christ ? 
And is it not clear that these abominable impu- 
tations were grafted on the communion of the 
faithful, and ridiculed in the most revolting 
manner by the Jews, in order to excite the hatred 
and horror of mankind against the rising 
Church ? 

IX. And now, Sir, that you see these two 



176 ANSWER TO THE [part U. 

points solidly established ; and the apostolicity 
of this discipline followed in all the churches 
during the first four centuries ; and the Eucha- 
ristic dogmas concealed beneath the secret ; ad- 
dress yourself, 1 pray you, to the Rector of Long 
Newton. Ask the teacher of a moral change, of 
a figurative presence, of a real absence, the cham- 
pion of literal bread and literal wine, and the 
adversary in consequence of the adoration of 
Jesus Christ in the Eucharist — ask him how an 
opinion so simple as his own, so conformable to 
our natural ideas, could have been ranked by 
antiquity among the mysteries ? how the Fathers 
could have taught the faithful of their time that 
they must rather shed every drop of their blood 
than divulge it ? how the numerous martyrs of 
Lyons could suffer themselves to be tormented 
and torn in pieces, rather than loudly declare it ? 
and how the reply of the magnanimous Blandina 
has excited and will excite the admiration of 
every age ? 

What, Sir ! are we to imagine that while the 
most horrid calumnies were disseminated on all 
sides against the primitive Christians ; while 
they w ere accused of murdering new-born infants 



< hap. ill.] i>i rricui/r ik<$ of romamsm. 177 

in their secret assemblies, of feeding upon their 
palpitating flesh, and intoxicating themselves 
with their blood— and of abandoning themselves 
afterwards like blind furies to excesses unheard 
of upon the earth ; while they were devoted as a 
race accursed to the execration of mankind, and 
to atrocious tortures ; that they would not open 
their mouths to declare their innocence ? At 
least for the purpose of charitably saving the 
magistrates and the multitude from the horror 
of commanding or contemplating so many bar- 
barous and protracted massacres ? From what 
motive could they have forbidden themselves an 
innocent and natural defence ? Why at least 
did they not say to their fellow citizens: " Come 
" then to our assemblies; see what passes there 
" amongst us ; we take a little bread and wine 
" in memory of our good Master, who delivered 
" us from sin and opened for us the way to 
" virtue. Fie himself commanded us to use this 
" simple and affecting ceremony: come, and 
" you will learn to know us better, and under- 
" stand what we really are ?" 

X. Nay more ; if the faith and practice of 
the first Christians had corresponded with the 

N 



178 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

belief of Mr. Faber ; if the Eucharist had been 
viewed in the same light by them, as it is by 
him ; not only would it never have formed part 
of the discipline of secrecy, but it never would 
have occasioned the malignity of their cruel 
enemies, who so far from believing their un- 
worthy calumnies, would never even have 
thought of inventing and propagating them.* 

1 assert, Sir, with full and entire conviction, 
that in this ancient discipline of secrecy, there 
is a certain mute, but perpetual and decisive 
evidence in favour of the real presence. It is in 
vain for the Rector to contend ; he will always 
find himself borne down by its irresistible force ; 
and struggle as he may, he will never rise from 
his overthrow. I say the same of your whole 
church ; let her assemble all her champions ; 
let her put forth through them every resource 
of wit and learning — and undoubtedly she pos- 
sesses much of both — she can never account for 
the establishment of secrecy w ith regard to the 
Eucharist. It will ever be to her a problem, 

* See page 363, vol. 1, of the Discussion Amicale — the fine 
theory of the two Anglican Bishops, Pearce and Hoadley, and 
of Prebendary Sturges, on the manner of presenting the 

Eucharist. 



chap. HI.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. j 79 

whose existence will be as incontestable, as its 
solution will remain impossible. To discover 
it, recourse must of necessity be had to Catholic 
principles ; and she must behold with us, in the 
primitive Church, the belief of the real presence 
of our Saviour in his sacrament, the heavenly, 
the ravishing object of our faith and adoration. 
Then it will be readily conceived that by 
divulging' the mystery so exalted and inac- 
cessible to reason, scandal would have been 
given to the pagans and catechumens ; and 
railleries provoked, which would infallibly 
have been poured forth by men who were 
not Christians, since you hear them incessantly 
even now from the mouths of your theologians 
and preachers. Then we can conceive that by 
speaking openly of the real presence, and of the 
change of substance, they would have shocked 
the imagination of the pagans, and kept those 
at a distance from the religion, whom it was 
their duty to attract to it. Then we can under- 
stand the precept of Jesns Christ, and the pro- 
hibition of the primitive Church, " to cast pearls 
" before swine. " Then also we can well con- 
ceive, that through obedience to the law of their 

N 2 



180 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

divine Legislator, and the command of his 
Church, the faithful would rather shed their 
blood, than betray the secret. Then are we in 
admiration at the faith and heroism of those 
martyrs, who without revealing the secret, were 
contented modestly to reply in the midst of 
torments, " there is no evil committed among 
" us." Then in fine every thing is understood 
and explained in those illustrious ages ; the 
rule of the Church — the exact conduct of the 
faithful — the self-devotion of her martyrs — and 
the frightful calumnies and atrocious torments, 
of which they were the glorious victims. 

I finish with one final conclusion. The dis- 
cipline of secrecy in the first four centuries is 
evidently incompatible with the actual doctrine 
of your Church ; but perfectly conformable with 
that of ours. I had reason therefore to say, 
that it was a general proof that in the first four 
centuries, the Christians believed what the Ca- 
tholics have believed, still believe, and will ever 
believe, the reality of the presence of our divine 
Saviour in the most holy and most adorable 
sacrament of the Eucharist.* 

* On the subject of the atrocious crimes attributed to the 



chap, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



181 



Second General Proof of the Catholic Doctrine 
on the Eucharist, taken from the ancient 
Liturgies, 

I. When I perceived at my second reading of 
The Difficulties of Romanism, the title of the 

first Christians, the Rector furnishes us with a striking proof of 
the candour of his soul, and the rectitude of his mind. He 
knows perfectly well that when we approach to the Holy Table, 
we are persuaded, as the persuasion generally was among you, 
up to the reign of Charles 11. that we receive, under the sensible 
appearance of bread, the body of Jesus Christ present in a 
supernatural manner, a body spiritualized, invisible, inaccessible 
to all the senses. Such is the mystery which we believe on the 
word of our God -Saviour. Now listen to the reasoning of 
Mr. Faber : "the pagans fancied that the early Christians 
" literally devoured human flesh and literally drank human 
" blood .... Now they could not with truth have denied the 
" existence of such abomination, if they had held the doctrine 
" of the real presence : for in that case, they must have been 
" conscious, that according to their full knowledge and belief, 
" they were in the constant habit of literally devouring human 
** flesh and of literally drinking human blood. Yet under the 
" most severe torments, they invariably and totally denied the 
" fact. Therefore by denying the fact, they of necessity denied 
"also the doctrine of the real presence." is it possible thus 
to keep those in the dark whom it is a duty to enlighten? 
Where is the Catholic in the whole world who can recognise 
liis sentiments in those attributed to him by Mr. Faber ? 
Which among us would not feel horror-struck at the idea of 
them ? His language answers to the notion of the men of 
Capharnaum ; and one might imagine him to have just arrived 
among us from their synagogue. 



182 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II- 



7th chapter, 1 laid down the book upon my 
table, and asked myself these questions : " W hat 
" will the Rector say here ? What part will he 
" take with regard to our ancient liturgies ?" 
They all speak uniformly, and in expressions the 
most energetic of our doctrines. All proclaim 
with one voice the altar, the oblation, the un- 
bloody sacrifice of the new covenant, the real 
presence of the victim, the change of substance, 
and in fine, the adoration. We see by them 
that all the Christians in the world, at the 
moment of communion heard from the mouth 
of the deacon these words, the body of Jesus 
Christ, and they replied, it is true. This Amen 
repeated by innumerable lips during a succession 
of generations and centuries, is an admirable 
confession of faith, which will resound from the 

In quoting Mr. Faber's words, I have purposely substituted 
the real presence for the word Iransubstantiation which he 
employs ; and my object was to shew you and make you sen- 
sible that his reasoning bears in the most direct manner, and in 
the first instance, against the doctrine of the real presence. 
He generally affects to reason only against the change of sub- 
stance; because having set out with assuring us that our 
respective churches are agreed as to the real presence, he is 
afraid of appearing to contradict himself. But I beseech you 
only to pay attention, and you will see that he combats the 
real presence almost wherever he names transubstantiation. 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF IIQMAN1SM. 183 

primitive Church even to the end of the world 
in proof of the real presence.* 

Would the Rector in those days have been 
daring enough to oppose his voice to that power- 
ful and universal testimony ; and instead of 
Amen, replied " I see nothing but a figure r" 
The liturgies agree in presenting us with lively 
invocations to beg of God to send his Holy 
Spirit upon the gifts offered, in order that the 
bread may become the body of Jesus Christ, and 
what is in the chalice may become his blood, by 
his changing them through the virtue of his 
Holy Spirit. j* Would Mr. Faber have raised 
his discordant voice to explain these invocations 
in his favourite language of a moral change ? 
and will he still maintain before us now, that in 
imploring the Divine Omnipotence to descend 
upon the gifi^ it was merely to change them 
from common and domestic use, to a service 
symbolical and religious ? The liturgies rep re- 

* Habet enim magnam vocem Christi sanguis in terra, cum 
eo accepto, ab omnibus gent'ibus respondetur Amen. August, 
contra Faust um. J jib. 12. 

+ The liturgy, called that of the apostles — transnmfet et 
pcrjiciat — Lit. >yri. translated by Renaudot. — Transmidante 
in te.. Lit. Nest, translated by Kenaudot. 



}84 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

gent to us the clergy and people by turns in 
fear and trembling*, in the attitude of profound 
adoration, when they partake of the Eucharist ; 
and put into their months at that time the most 
lively confessions of faith in a presence which 
commands the sovereign worship of latria. 
What then would have been the expression of 
the Rector's countenance in the midst of these 
fervent assemblies ? Would he have shared the 
ardent devotion, the religious awe of those hum- 
ble adorers of Jesus Christ ? or rather will he 
not be ready to involve them with us in the 
guilt of idolatry ? Will he not accuse them 
together with us of rendering sacrilegious wor- 
ship to material things, and to speak in his own 
language, to a morsel of literal bread ? 

After revolving these reflections in my mind 
for some time, I resumed the book, and read 
with avidity the chapter on the liturgies. W hat 
reply then does the Rector make to their decisive 
authority ? None whatever, Sir — to my utter 
astonishment, none. He would have done better 
therefore if he had not mentioned the liturgies 
in the title, since he says not a word of them in 
the chapter, Doubtless it is wise to keep silence 



CHAP. DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 185 

about proofs which we are not prepared to com- 
bat ; but it would have been wiser, more candid 
and more courageous to surrender to their vic- 
torious power. I will endeavour again to con- 
front the Rector with the liturgies. When he 
looks them a second time full in the face, per- 
haps he will receive a more favourable impres- 
sion. I even augur it from his silence. For if 
he could have pounced upon them in any part, 
he would certainly have done it, with the lauda- 
ble zeal that animates him. Being unwilling 
however to interrupt the reflections which I am 
compelled to submit to you, I shall place my 
extracts from the liturgies at the end of them. 
I regret that I am obliged to revert to them, and 
to swell out my reply to his book by a long 
addition, which he might have spared me the 
trouble of doing, if he had pleased. 

II. It must have been proved to a demonstra- 
tion to you Sir, that the discipline of secrecy 
covered with a mysterious and impenetrable 
shade the assemblies of the Christians, the dog- 
mas therein professed, the prayers there made to 
God, and the rites there practised. These rites, 
prayers and dogmas, so long unknown to the 



186 ANSWER TO THE [ PART 1X . 

profane, the liturgies revealed to the world, as 
soon as they were committed to writing. We 
have the good fortune to possess a great number 
of them, and from almost every country where 
Christianity reigned in the fifth century. They 
do not leave a shadow of doubt of the conse- 
quences which we have deduced from the disci- 
pline of the secret, by the aid of simple reason- 
ing : they confirm their justice and truth, and 
establish our first assertions. They introduce 
us to the interior of the oratories, where the 
early faithful assembled. We see them placed 
there in perfect order; the men on one side, 
the women on the other ; the children nearest 
to the sanctuary. There we behold the cate- 
chumens, here the penitent ; and the bishop 
advancing to the altar preceded by his clergy. 
With them we assist at the divine worship, the 
same in every country, at least as to every thing 
essential. With them we partake in the prayers, 
and lectures from the Old and New Testaments. 
Shortly after we hear the officiating deacon raise 
his voice and say, "depart in peace," addressing 
the catechumens.* 

* Litur. of the Aposl. Constit. — u Catechumens, retire ; 



chap, ill ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 187 

Then it was that the divine office began, the 
celebration of the holy mysteries. They dis- 
posed themselves for the sacrifice by preparatory 
prayers : the bread and wine were removed 
from the credence table to the altar. The graces 
and blessings of God were invoked upon the 
assembly of the faithful, upon the Catholic 
Church, the sovereigns, and magistrates, upon 
the army, the bishops and clergy, upon every 
class of the faithful, enemies and persecutors, 
the Christians who were in prison or condemned 
to the mines, for the conversion of the gentiles, 
the return of schismatics and heretics, for the 
salubrity of the air, and the preservation of the 
fruits of the earth. They commemorated the 
patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs and con- 
fessors ; and prayed for all who had departed 
this life in the faith.* Then came the preface, 

" let no one remain here." Lit. ofConstantinop. " Let there 
" be no catechumens any longer, nor any of those who are not 
" initiated in the mysteries." " Let each one be known, and 
" the doors carefully kept." Lit. of St. James. 

* From the birth of the Church to the sixteenth century no 
liturgy was ever known without a commemoration of the saints, 
and prayers for the dead. " We make memory of the patri- 
" archs, prophets, apostles and martyrs, that by the merit of 
" their prayers, God may favourably receive ours : we pray 



188 ANSWER TO THE [_pa K.T 11. 

the beginning and end of which are the same at 
this day. It was the introduction to the prin- 
cipal action of the sacrifice, which we call now, 
as formerly, the canon ; in which they never 
failed to repeat the words of the institution of 
the Eucharist in the same terms as those of the 
evangelists. To these were added, particularly 
in the East, admirable invocations to beg of God 
to send upon the gifts his Holy Spirit, the wit- 
ness of the sufferings of our Lord Jesus, that by 
his presence and power the bread and wine 
might be changed into the body and blood of 
Jesus Christ. The Lord's Prayer and the Apos- 
tles' Creed were commonly recited after the 
canon. The fervour excited by the approach 
of the consecration was kept alive after it : it 
even increased and became profound adoration, 
when the deacons distributing to the faithful 
both species, said to each one, " This is the body, 
" this is the blood of Jesus Christ." The re- 

a afterwards for the holy fathers and bishops, and in fine for 
" all departed in our communion, believing that their souls 
" receive great relief from the prayers which we offer for them 
" at the moment when the holy and awful victim lies upon our 
" altars." — S* Cyril of Jerusalem Cat. Myst. 5. — Ab uno disce 
omnes. 



cttAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 189 

ceiver answered M Amen." This affecting spec- 
tacle of love and devotion, worthy of the regard 
of heaven and the admiration of earth, con- 
cluded with lively acts of thanksgiving, 

111. Such, in the primitive church, was the 
order of the divine service, which the Christians 
celebrated with the doors shut, and which they 
kept secret every where else with a fidelity which 
nothing could overcome. We have seen them 
suffering torments and death, rather than divulge 
what passed in their pious assemblies. The 
liturgy was the faithful representation in detail 
of their worship. You will therefore readily 
imagine that it was not committed to writing. 
The secret would have been exposed to too many 
risks, if each church had written its own. From 
the beginning they had adopted the only means 
of avoiding accidents, and concealing the know- 
ledge of the mysteries from the profane. It had 
been determined that the prayers of the liturgy 
and consecration should be confided to the 
memory of the priests and bishops, as also the 
creed to the memory of the faithful.* This 

* ci The symbol of our faith and hope comes to us from the 
u apostles, and is not written." — St. Jerom Ep. ad Pam. 



190 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



salutary precaution continued as long as the 

apprehensions which had rendered it necessary. 

But at length Christianity having gained the 

ascendancy, there was no longer any hesitation 

in publishing the mysteries. This happy period 

was about the time of the general council of 

Ephesus, in 431. It is even fair to presume 

that this determination was taken by the fathers 

of that council ; for then the liturgies began to 

be written every where all at once. The Nesto- 

rians and Eutychians soon imitated the example 

of the Catholic Church ; and in a short time, 

every church in the East had its liturgy written.* 

IV. But here, Sir, you will be inclined to 

ask, how are we sure that liturgies written three 

centuries and a half after the apostles' time, 

came originally from them ? In this manner : 

" No one writes the creed ; it cannot be read ; repeat it to 
u yourselves every day, when you lie down and when you rise. 
" Let your memory be your book." — Sit vobis codex vestra 
memoria. — S. Aug. ad Catech. T. 6, p. 548. 

* We only know of two liturgies written previous to the 
council of Ephesus ; that w hich I have quoted of St. Cyril, and 
that of the anonymous author of the Apostolic Constitutions ; 
and both contained a strong prohibition to communicate them 
to the uninitiated, because of the sacred things they contain. 
Hence at the time when they were written, the discipline of 
secrecy was still in vigour. 



CHAP, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 191 

it cannot be reasonably doubted, that the earliest 
liturgy was drawn up by the apostles con- 
formably with the instructions of their Master, 
and celebrated by them in those daily assem- 
blies which they held at Jerusalem before they 
separated. Of this indeed we have positive 
evidence. St. Irenseus, a disciple of St. Poly- 
carp, assures us of it in these words : " Our Lord 
" taught the new oblation of his New Testa- 
" ment : the Church has received it from the 
" apostles, and presents it to God in every part 
" of the world."* This declaration establishes 
the fact decisively : and we naturally conceive 
that the apostles departing singly from Jeru- 
salem would give the same liturgy which they 
had there composed together, to the churches 
founded by them in the course of their preach- 
ing the gospel. 

St. Epiphanius, though born in 310, two 
hundred and ten years after St. John, is never- 
theless a valuable witness in this matter, because 
he united with the virtues of a great prelate, the 
science of a consummate theologian. Observe 
what he says after repeating the names of the 

* Adv. Hceres. Lib, 4, cap. 32. 



192 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX H . 

twelve. "They were all elected apostles, to 
" preach the holy gospel over the world, with 
u Paul, Barnabas, and the rest ; and they were 
" the institutors of the mysteries, with James 
" the brother of our Lord, and first bishop of 
" Jerusalem."* We discover in Pliny some 
confused traces of the liturgy which the Chris- 
tians celebrated under his government.-]* St. 
Justin represents it to us more distinctly in the 
account which he thought it a duty to give to 
the Emperor Antoninus, of what the Christians 
did in their secret assemblies. The description 
which he gives corresponds precisely with the 
liturgies.*}: 1 have adduced other authorities in 
my ninth letter and its appendix at the end of 
the 1st vol. of the Discussion Amicale ; I beg to 
refer you to it. 

V. I see plainly enough, you will reply, that 
the apostles composed a liturgy together ; I 
conceive too that they would communicate it to 
the churches which they founded : but where are 
we to find this apostolic liturgy in these days ? 
We have a great number which differ from each 
other considerably. If we suppose that these 

* Hares. 79, No. 3. t Letter to Trajan. % 1st Apol. 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 193 

were traced upon the model of the primitive 
liturgy drawn up at Jerusalem, by what mark 
are we to distinguish what comes from the ai>os- 
ties, from what does not ? I have laid down the 
certain and indubitable mark of distinction in 
my ninth letter, where you may see it solidly 
proved. The finger of the apostles is manifest 
wherever the various liturgies all unanimously 
agree. This apostolic mark has been acknow- 
ledged and described by eminent men in your 
church : and persuaded as I must be, that their 
judgment will have more weight with you 
than mine, I will here present you with it. 44 It 
44 was highly unreasonable to suppose," says 
Dr. Waterland, " that those several churches, 
44 very distant from each other in place, and of 
44 different languages, .... should all unite in 
44 the same errors, and deviate uniformly from 
44 their rule at once. But that they should all 
44 agree in the same common faith, might easily 
44 be accounted for, as arising from the same 
44 common cause, which could be no other but 
44 the common delivery of the same uniform 
44 faith and doctrine to all the churches by the 

44 apostles themselves. Such unanimity could 

o 



194 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

" never come by chance, but must be derived 
" from one common source ; and therefore the 
" harmony of their doctrine was in itself a preg- 
44 nant argument of the truth of it."* 

Archbishop Wake says, " As for the liturgies 
" ascribed to St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James, 
" there is not I suppose any learned man, who 
44 believes them written by those holy men, and 
" set forth in the manner they are now pub- 
" lished. They were indeed the ancient liturgies 
44 of the three, if not of the four patriarchal 
44 churches — viz. the Roman (perhaps that of 
" Antioch too) the Alexandrian, and Jerusalem 
44 Churches, first founded, or at least governed 
44 by St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James. How- 
44 ever, since it can hardly be doubted, but that 
44 these holy apostles and evangelists did give 
44 some directions for the administration of the 
44 blessed Eucharist in those churches, it may 
44 reasonably be presumed, that some of those 
44 orders are still remaining in those liturgies, 
44 which have been brought down to us under 
44 their names ; and that those prayers wherein 

* Importance of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity , pp. 372 ? 

373, 



chap, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



195 



" they ail agree (in sense at least, if not in words) 
" were first prescribed in the same or like terms 
" by those apostles and evangelists ; nor would 
44 it be difficult to make a further proof of this 
" conjecture from the writings of the ancient 
" fathers, if it were needful in this place to 
" insist upon it. 55 * 

" I add to what hath been already observed," 
says Bishop Buil/j* " the consent of all the Chris- 

* Discourse before his translation of the apostolical fathers, 
p. 102. 

+ Sermons on Common Prayer. Serm. 13, vol. 1, new edit. 
I had remarked that if bishop Bull had with just reason con- 
cluded from the liturgies the necessity of acknowledging the 
unbloody sacrifice of the new law, a man so well informed 
ought equally to have inferred the necessity of believing the 
real presence of the divine victim, the change of substance and 
adoration; since the liturgies are no less unanimous on these 
dogmas than on the sacrifice. I had quoted previously the 
following truly orthodox words of the same bishop : " If it be 
" imagined that all the pastors could have fallen into error and 
" deceived all the faithful, how can the word of Jesus Christ 
u be defended, who promised his apostles, and their successors 
" in their persons, to be always with them ? A promise which 
u would not be true, since the apostles were not to live so long 
" a time, if their successors were not here comprehended in the 
" persons of the apostles themselves." I had added, that with 
such accurate reasoning, he ought to have come over to the 
Catholic Church. What does Mr. Faber say in reply to my 
reflections ? He observes that bishop Bull, notwithstanding 
died in the bosom of the Church of England. This 1 well 

o 2 



190 ANSWER TO THE [part II 

" tian Churclies in the world, however distant 
" from each other, in the prayer of the oblation 
" of the Christian sacrifice in the Holy Eu- 
" charist, or sacrament of the Lord^s supper ; 
" which consent is indeed wonderful. All the 
" ancient liturgies agree in this form of prayer, 
" almost in the same words, but fully and ex- 
" actly in the same sense, order and method ; 
" which whosoever attentively considers, must 
" be convinced, that this order of prayer was 
" delivered to the several churches in the very 
" first plantation and settlement of them." 

I conclude with Grotius, who is honoured by 
all parties as he deserves: "I find," says he in 
his Votum pro pace, " in all the liturgies, Greek, 
" Latin, Arabic, Syriac, and others, prayers to 
u God, that he would consecrate by his Holy 
" Spirit the gifts offered, and make them the 

knew, and deplored his inconsistency. Let the Hector explain 
it as he pleases ; I can only lament over it, and leave the judg- 
ment to Him who searches the reins and the consciences of men. 

For the rest, I find, on the subject of the liturgies, men of 
your Church equally clever and more consistent than bishop 
Bull. Whiston, Stephens, and Grabe, composed liturgies in 
which they included the unbloody and rational sacrifice, the 
real presence, change of substance and adoration. — See Discus- 
sion Amicale, vol. 1, p. 426. 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 197 

44 body and blood of his Son. I was right 
44 therefore in saying that a custom so ancient 
44 and universal that it must be considered to 
44 have come down from the primitive times, 
44 ought not to have been changed." 

44 In the matter of worship," say the ministers 
of Neuchatel, in the preface prefixed to their 
liturgy, dedicated to the King of Prussia in 
1713, 44 great regard must be had to what was 
44 the practice of the first ages of the Church ; 
44 and it must be acknowledged that we find in 
44 the prayers of the ancients a very peculiar 
44 simplicity and unction. Besides, who can 
44 doubt that what was done in those times, and 
44 established by the successors of the apostles, 
44 was most conformable to the spirit of the 
44 gospel, and deserving of respect from all 
44 Christians ? It is true that the usages of 
44 churches varied considerably afterwards .... 
44 but it is certain that t lie foundation and essence 
44 of the ancient worship has been preserved in 
44 almost all the liturgies ; and that if, without 
" regard to what is peculiar to each liturgy, and 
44 what was added in proportion as ignorance, 
44 error and superstition found their way into 



198 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART II 



" the Church, we retained what was of ancient 
" and general use, and what all liturgies agree in 
" ivithin a very little, we should have the true 
44 form of worship among- the primitive Chris- 
" tians. Such also would be one of the best 
44 means of arriving at that uniformity, so neces- 
44 sary for the peace and edification of the 
44 Church."* 

VI. If then it should happen that in the midst 
of variations unavoidable in the lapse of so 
many centuries, so many events, idioms and 
churches of different kinds, nevertheless all the 
liturgies agreed in the sense of those prayers 
which precede, accompany and follow the con- 

* It is impossible to think on this subject more sensibly 
than Messrs. Waterland, Wake, Bull, and these ministers of 
Neuchatel. They agree in theory, as your doctors do, that all 
that ought to be retained, in which all the liturgies agree ! 
You say this, you teach it, and still you do not practise it ! 
All the liturgies have exhibited and will here exhibit to you the 
altar, the unbloody sacrifice, the real presence of the divine 
victim, the change of substance, the adoration, and prayers for 
the dead ; and you do not retain these sublime doctrines, but 
trample them under foot! You have pronounced your own 
condemnation. And your contradictions do not open your 
eyes! Nor the eyes of those who hear you! What? so many 
lights to distinguish what is good, and so much obstinacy in 
rejecting it! Great God! will they never recover from such 
blindness : 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 199 

secration ; and if those prayers clearly expressed 
the real presence, transubstantiation, adoration 
and sacrifice, we must conclude that such uni- 
formity, while it designated the essence of the 
liturgy, denoted also its apostolic origin. For 
it were impossible to suppose any other cause 
of such uniformity. We can find no other 
sufficiently preponderating and universal to 
unite in this manner all the churches in the 
world in one spirit, one perfect adherence to 
these same dogmas, and one attention alike 
scrupulous to profess them in the same circum- 
stances. There is no council to which this sin- 
gular unanimity could be attached ; and indeed 
the most oecumenical couucil would not have 
sufficed ; because the heretics would never have 
followed its decisions, and the schismatical com- 
munions of the fourth and fifth centuries, being 
as inimical to each other, as to the mother church, 
would never have agreed together to adopt the 
forms of prayer and professions of faith drawn 
up by the council. Nothing then but the insti- 
tution and authority of the apostles, held by all 
equally sacred, can adequately account for such 
uniformity, if it really exists in the Christian 



•200 ANSWER TO THE [part H. 

liturgies written in the fourth and fifth cen- 
turies. Now 1 pledge myself to convince you 
in the most palpable manner, that all the litur- 
gies of those times, in use not only in the 
Catholic Church, but even among* the schisma- 
tics and heretics, unanimously agree in the 
prayers which precede, accompany and follow 
the consecration ; and that they express in the 
clearest and most energetic manner the belief of 
sacrifice, of the real presence, of transubstantia- 
tion and adoration. The fact in question is 
most easy to demonstrate, and established by 
authentic quotations extracted from all these 
liturgies. I will collect them for you, and let 
them pass in review before your eyes. 



Extracts from the various Liturgies. 

" We offer to thee who art King and God, this 
" bread and this chalice, according to the order 
" of our Saviour ; returning thee thanks through 
" Him, for having vouchsafed to permit us to 
" exercise the priesthood in thy presence. We 
" beseech thee to look down favourably upon 
4 these gifts in honour of Jesus Christ, and to 



CHAP. 1H.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM, 201 

44 send down upon this sacrifice thy Holy Spirit, 
" the witness of the sufferings of our Lord Jesus 
" Christ, that he may make this bread become the 
44 body of thy Christ, and this chalice his blood ; 
44 we offer to thee, &c."* The prayers are long 
and very beautiful. At the moment of com- 
munion, the people exclaim ; 44 Hosanna to the 
44 Son of David, blessed be the Lord God who 
44 cometh in the name of the Lord, and has 
44 shewn himself to us." The rubric adds : 44 The 
44 Bishop gives the Eucharist with these words : 
44 It is the body of Jesus Christ. The receiver 
" answers ; Amen. The Deacon gives the cha- 
44 lice, saying : It is the blood of Jesus Christ, 
44 the cup of life. The receiver answers ; Amen. 
44 and after the communion, the Deacon begins 
44 the thanksgiving, saying : after having received 
44 the precious body and the precious blood of 
44 Jesus Christ, let us give thanks to Him who 
44 has made us partake of his mysteries." The 
Bishop concludes it by a noble prayer. 

In the liturgy, rather alluded to than reported 

* Liturgy taken from the 8th Book of the Apostolic 
Constitutions, written in the 4th century. 



202 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

in the second book, we read simply as follows : 
" The benediction is followed by the sacrifice, 
" during which all the people should remain 
" standing and pray in silence ; and after it is 
" offered, each one in order should receive the 
" body and blood of the Lord, and approach to 
" it with the fear and reverence due to the body 
" of the King." 

" We beseech thee, O God, to cause that this 
" oblation may be in all things blessed, admit- 
" ted, ratified, reasonable and acceptable, that it 
" may become for us the body and blood of thy 
well beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ 
And after the consecration : " We offer to thy 
" supreme majesty, of thy gifts and benefits, 
" a pure host, a holy host, an unspotted host, the 
" holy bread of eternal life, and the chalice of 
" everlasting salvation." And at the moment 
of communion, the Priest bowing down in senti- 
ments of profound adoration and humility, 
addresses himself to Jesus Christ present in his 
hands, and says to him three times : " Lord, I am 
" not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my 
" roof ; but say only the word, and my soul 
" shall be healed*" And giving the communion, 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 203 

as in receiving it himself, he declares again that 
it is the body of our Lord Jesus Christ* 

Such were the expressions of the liturgy in- 
troduced into the British isles in the year 595, 
and which was universally celebrated till the 
16th century in the three kingdoms of England, 
Ireland, and Scotland, as it has been for many 
centuries in France, Germany, Spain, and every 
country in the world where there are Latin 
priests. It would be superfluous to produce 
in this place the ancient liturgy of Spain, since 
we know from the learned St. Isidore among 
others, who succeeded his brother St. Leander 
in the see of Seville in 600, that it was conform- 
able to the Roman liturgy, of which we have 
just given an extract, in the canon and essential 
parts of the mass. 

Unfortunately we have no manuscript or 
monument to inform us of the ancient liturgy 
of Gaul, in its full extent and without any 
mixture of others. There remains an abridged 
exposition of the mass, composed by St. Ger- 
man us, of Paris, in the middle of the 6th 

* The Roman Liturgy, according to the sacramentary of 
Gelasius. 



204 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

century. By the help of this small treatise, and 
of what we find in the works of St. Gregory of 
Tours, a few years after St. Germanus, we learn 
however accurately enough the ancient order of 
the Gallican mass, and the learned discover in it 
more analogy with the oriental liturgies, than 
with the Roman. 

St. Germanus, speaking of the gifts placed 
upon the altar, says, " The bread is transformed 
" into the body, and the wine into the blood. The 
" Lord having said of the bread, this is my body, 
44 and of the wine, this is my blood. The obla- 
44 tion is consecrated upon the paten. The 
44 angel of God descends upon the altar as upon 
44 the monument, and blesses the host. When 
44 the fraction takes place, the clergy, in a sup- 
44 pliant posture, will sing the anthem : Vouch- 
44 safe, we humbly beseech thee, to receive this 
<c sacrifice, to bless it, and sanctify it, that it may 
44 become for us a lawful Eucharist in thy name, 
44 and that of thy Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 
44 being transformed into the body and. blood of 
44 our Lord Jesus Christ."* 



* Gallican Liturgy — Mass of the Circumcision. 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 205 

" May the spirit, the comforter of thy blessing, 
" thy co-eternal co-operator descend, O my God, 
" upon these sacrifices, that .... this aliment 
" being transformed into flesh, this chalice into 
" blood, what we have offered for our sins, may 
" save us by his merits. Ut translatd fruge in 
" corpore, calice in cruore, proficiat meritis quod 
" obtulimus pro delictis."* 

" Beseeching by our fervent supplications, 
" that he who changed water into wine would 
" change into blood the wine which we offer."*)* 

The Gothico-Gallican Missal of the end of the 
seventh century contains a prayer to God in 
form of invocation. " That thou wonldst vouch- 
" safe to look down with an eye of mercy upon 
" these gifts brought to thy altar, and that the 
" Holy Spirit of thy Son would cover them with 
" his shadow." As also this prayer after the 
consecration : " Being mindful of the passion 
" and resurrection of our most glorious Lord, we 
" offer to thee, O God, this spotless host, this 
" reasonable host, this unbloody host." Again 
the following prayer before the communion : 



* Mass of the Assumption. 



+ On the Epiphany. 



206 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" Accomplishing the sacred solemnities which 
" we have offered to thee according to the rite of 
" the high-priest Melchisedech, we devoutly be- 
" seech thee, O eternal Majesty, for grace to re- 
" ceive this bread, changed into flesh by the opera- 
" tion of thy power, this drink, changed into 
" blood, and to drink from the chalice the same 
" blood which ran from thy side upon the cross " 
The priest takes the bread, and says of Jesus 
Christ : # " Taking the bread in his holy, 
" spotless, and immortal hands, lifting up his 
" eyes to heaven, shewing it to thee, O God, his 
" Father, giving thanks to thee, sanctifying it, 
u and breaking it, he gave it to us his disciples 
" and his apostles, saying : take and eat, this is 
" my body which is broken for you, and for the 
" remission of sins. (They answer Amen). " In 
" like manner after he had supped, taking the 
" chalice and mixing water with the wine, look- 
" ing up to heaven, shewing it to thee, O God 
" the Father, and giving thanks, sanctifying it, 
" blessing it, tilling it with the Holy Spirit, he 
" gave it to us his disciples, saying : Drink ye all 



* Liturgy of St. John, or of Jerusalem. 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 207 

" of it ; it is my blood of the New Testament, 
" which is shed for you and for many, and which 
" is given for the remission of sins and after- 
wards ; " We offer to thee, O Lord, this awful 
" and unbloody sacrifice." And again ; " His 
" vivifying spirit who reigns with thee, O God 
" the Father, and with thy only Son, who spoke 
" in the law and in the prophets, and in thy 
" New Testament, who appeared and rested in 
" the form of a dove upon Jesus Christ our Lord 
" in the river of Jordan, who descended in the 
" form of fiery tongues in the supper-room of 
" the holy and glorious Sion ; send down now 
" this Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts, 
" that by his holy, beneficent, and glorious pre- 
" sence, he may make this bread the sacred body 
" of Jesus Christ, Amen; and this chalice the 
" precious blood of Jesus Christ, Amen" Before 
communion, the priest thus addresses himself to 
Jesus Christ upon the altar : " O Lord my God ! 
" who art the bread of heaven, and life of the 
" world, I have sinned against heaven, and 
" against thee ; and I am not worthy to partake 
" of thy most pure mysteries : but through thy 
" divine mercy, grant that, without incurring 



208 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" condemnation, thy grace may make me worthy 
• 4 to receive thy sacred body and thy precious 
" blood, for the remission of my sins, and life 
" eternal." At the communion of the people, 
the deacon says : 44 Approach with fear, with 
" faith, and with love." The people answer : 
44 Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the 
44 Lord." 

44 Receive us at thy holy altar," says the priest 
making the oblation, 44 according to thy great 
" mercy ; grant that we may be worthy to offer 
" thee this rational, unbloody sacrifice, for our 
44 sins, and for all the ignorances of the people."* 
Then after the words of institution, which are 
not omitted in any liturgy with which I am ac- 
quainted, the priest bowing down says in secret : 
" We offer to thee this rational and unbloody 
" worship ; and we beseech, we pray and entreat, 
44 send down thy Holy Spirit upon us, and upon 
44 these offerings : .... make indeed this bread 
44 the precious body of thy Christ" The deacon 
answers, 44 Amen." And what is in this chalice, 
" the precious blood of thy Christ" The deacon, 

* Liturgy of Constantinople^ called that of the Apostles, 
and later, that of St. Chrysostom. 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 209 

u Amen." 44 Changing them by thy Holy 
44 Spirit." The deacon, " Amen, Amen, Amen." 
After several prayers, addressing himself to 
Jesus Christ, the priest says : " Look down on 
" us, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, from thy 
" holy dwelling, and from the throne of the 
44 glory of thy kingdom, and come to sanctify 
44 us, thou who sittest together with the Father 
44 in the highest heavens, and art here invisibly 
44 present with us ; and vouchsafe, with thy 
44 powerful hand, to impart to us thy immacu- 
44 late body and thy precious blood, and by us to 
44 all the people." The priest and deacon in 
adoration say each three times : 44 Have mercy on 
44 me a poor sinner." The people adore in like 
manner. Before the communion, the priest says 
to the deacon : 44 Draw near." The deacon bows 
reverently before the priest, who holds a part of 
the sacred host. The deacon says : 44 Give me, 
44 O Lord, the precious and holy body of our 
44 Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ." The 
priest gives it into his hand, saying : 44 I give to 
44 thee the precious and holy and pure body of our 
44 Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ." — 
Then the priest and deacon bowing down and 



210 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

holding the sacred host, make together an ad- 
mirable confession of faith, which begins thus : " I 
" believe, O Lord, and I confess, that thou art the 
" Christ the Son of the living God, who didst 
" come into the world to save sinners, of whom I 
44 am the chief ; make me a partaker of thy mys- 
44 tical supper. I will not reveal the mystery to 
44 thy enemies ; nor will I give thee a kiss like 
44 Judas ; but like the good thief, I confess what 
44 thou art." I regret that T cannot here tran- 
scribe the whole of this confession, which ends 
with these words : 44 O Lord our God, forgive me 
44 all my sins, thou who art goodness itself ; arid 
44 by the intercession of thy immaculate Mother, 
44 ever Virgin, grant that without incurring con- 
44 demnation, 1 may receive thy precious and most 
44 pure body." Then the priest presents the 
chalice to the deacon, who says : 44 Behold I come 
44 to the immortal King : 1 believe, O Lord, and 
44 confess that thou art the Christ, the Son of the 
44 living God." The priest says to him, 44 Ser- 
44 vant of God, Deacon N. thou dost communi- 
44 cate of the precious and holy body and blood 
44 of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for the 
4i remission of thy sins, and everlasting life." 



CHAP. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 

The deacon going to communicate the people, 
says: "Approach to God with fear and faith ; 
44 the choir answers, Amen, Amen, Amen • blessed 
" is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." — 
Receiving the consecrated species of bread and 
wine in a spoon, the communicant says : 44 I be- 
44 lieve, O Lord, and confess that thou art truly 
44 the Son of the living God." The deacon says 
to him : 44 Servant of God, receive the most holy 
44 body and the precious blood of our Saviour 
44 Jesus Christ^ 

This liturgy is followed by all the Greeks 
who are in the West, at Rome, in Calabria, in 
Apuelia; by the Mingrelians, Georgians, Bulga- 
rians, Russians, and Muscovites ; by all the 
modern Melchite Christians dependant on the 
patriarch of Alexandria residing at Cairo, on the 
patriarch of Jerusalem, and the patriarch of 
Antioch resident at Damascus. 

Those from which we shall now give extracts 

are* the liturgy of St. Mark, called that of St. 

Cyril ; that of St. Basil and that of St. Gregory 

of Nazianzum. The Jacobite Coptic Christians 

opposed to the council ofChalcedon in 451 have 

* Liturgy of Alexandria. 
p 2 



212 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

continued to make use of them, and have done 
so for 1200 years. 

In the preparatory prayer, the priest says : 
" O Lord, do thou make us worthy, by the 
" power of thy Holy Spirit, to perform this 
" ministry, that we may not incur judgment 
" before the throne of thy glory, and may offer 
44 thee this sacrifice of blessing." Some of the 
" words of the oblation : 44 O Lord Jesus Christ, 
44 only begotten Son, word of God the Father, 
" consubstantial and co-eternal with Him and 
" the Holy Ghost .... look down on this bread 
" and on this chalice, which we have placed on 
44 this thy sacerdotal table ; bless them, sanctify 
44 them, and consecrate them ; change them, so 
44 that indeed this bread may become thy holy 
C4 body ; and that which is mixed in this chalice, 
44 thy precious blood." After having religiously 
recited the words of institution, the priest con- 
tinues : 44 We adore thee, according to the good 
44 pleasure of thy will, and we entreat thee, O 
44 Christ, our God, we sinners and thy unworthy 
44 servants, that thy Holy Spirit may come down 
44 upon us, and upon his proposed gifts, to 
44 sanctify them, .... and to make of this bread 



CHAP, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 213 

" the holy body of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
" Christ himself, who is given for the remission 
" of sins and everlasting life to him who shall 
" receive him." The people answer Amen. 
" And of this chalice to make the precious blood 
" of the New Testament of our Lord, God and 
" Saviour Jesus Christ himself, who is given for 
" the remission of sins and everlasting life to 
" him who shall receive him." The people 
answer Amen. At the breaking of the host the 
priest says, " O Lord our God, .... thou who 
" hast sanctified these oblations placed before 
" thee, by making thy Holy Spirit descend upon 
" them." At the approach of the communion, 
the Deacon gives notice by these words ; " be 
" attentive and trembling before God." The 
people : " O Lord, have mercy on us." Then 
the priest taking in his hand the larger part of 
the host, elevates it, and then bows down and 
exclaims with a loud voice : " Holy things for 
" holy persons." The people prostrate with 
their faces to the ground. Then comes the pro- 
fession of faith, which the priest makes in these 
terms : " The holy body, and precious, pure, 
" true blood of Jesus Christ the Son, our God* 



214 ANSWER, TO THE [pAltl II. 

44 Amen. The body and blood of Emmanuel, 
" our God, this is in real truth. Amen. I be- 
" lieve, I believe, I believe, and confess, to the 
44 last breath of my life, that this is the life- 
44 giving body of thine only begotten Son, our 
44 Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ. He re- 
44 ceived it from the Lady of us all, the Mother 
44 of God, the sacred and holy Mary, and made 
44 it one with his divinity, without confusion, 
44 without mixture or alteration. He gave of 
44 himself a good testimony before Pontius 
44 Pilate, and delivered himself for us to the tree 
44 of the holy cross, by his only will, and for us 
i4 all. I believe truly that his divinity was never 
44 separated from his humanity, not an hour, not 
44 the twinkling of an eye.* He delivered up 
44 his body for the salvation, remission of sins 
44 and eternal life of those who shall receive him. 
44 Thus 1 believe in exact truth. 

* These words convey a sense perfectly Catholic ; they 
mark union and not mixture ; they do not confound the two 
natures as the Eutychians did. And in fact the Jacobites 
attached to Dioscorus, rejected, it is true, the council of Chal- 
cedon, which had condemned him ; but they equally anathe- 
matized Nestorius and Eutyches, according to the edict of 
union of the emperor Zeno, which they always received. 

+ We are indebted for the information acquired upon the 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 215 

The liturgies of Ethiopia or of Abyssinia so 
much resemble those of the Coptic Jacobites, 
that it will suffice to quote some passages pecu- 
liar to them. The liturgy instituted by the 318 
Fathers expresses the invocation in the following 
manner : " We beseech thee therefore and en- 
" treat thee, O Lord, graciously to send thy 
" Holy Spirit, and to cause him to descend, to 
" come and diffuse his light over this bread, that 
" it may become the body of our Lord, and that 
" what is contained in this chalice may be changed 



subject of the Coptic Jacobites, to the travels, intelligence and 
labours of the learned Vausleb, born at Erfurt. He studied 
Ethiopian language under M. Ludolff, who induced the Duke 
of Saxony to send him to the Levant, and into Ethiopia, in the 
hope of his making discoveries there favourable to Lutheranism. 
Not being able to reach Ethiopia, Vausleb applied himself to 
the Jacobite liturgies, examined them thoroughly, was convinced 
by them of the errors of his own communion, became a Catholic, 
and afterwards a Dominican at Rome. He came into France, 
and was graciously received by M. Colbert. This great 
minister, who sought nothing so eagerly as men capable of 
seconding" his vast and noble designs, sent him back to the 
Levant, with orders to purchase all the oriental MSS. which he 
could find. Vausleb sent more than five hundred to the 
Bibliotheque du lloi. After vainly attempting to penetrate 
into Ethiopia, he returned in 1676 into France, where he died 
a few years afterwards. 



216 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

" and may become the blood of Jesus Christ.* 
Another liturgy translated into Latin by Mr. 
Ludolff, a Lutheran, speaks thus: " We beseech 
" thee, O Lord, and entreat thee, to send thy 
" Holy Spirit and his power upon this bread, and 
" upon this chalice, that he may make of them 
44 the body and blood of our Saviour JesusChrist, 
44 our Lord for ages of ages." 

The liturgy called of the Apostles-]* after the 
words of our Saviour, continues thus : 44 The 
44 people say ; Amen, Amen, Amen ; we believe, 
44 it, we are certain of it, we praise thee, O 
44 Lord, our God. It is truly thy body, we believe 
it to be so ; and after the words over the chalice, 
44 the people say Amen, it is truly thy blood, we 
44 believe it." Here we see before the commu- 
nion that lively and strong profession of faith 
which I have copied from the Coptic liturgy : it 
stands here with the same expressions. The 
Priest gives the communion to the people with 
these words : 44 This is the bread of life which 
44 comes down from heaven, truly the precious 



* Translation of Vausleb, History oj Alexandria, Chapter 
t> n Transubsi antiation. 

+ Latin translation of Rcnaudot* 



CHAP, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 217 

" body of Emmanuel, our God." The communi- 
cant answers, "Amen," The deacon presents 
the chalice, saying: "This is the chalice of life, 
" which comes down from heaven, and which is 
" the precious blood of Jesns Christ " The com- 
municant answers, " Amen, Amen." 

The liturgies were much more multiplied 
among the Syrians, than among the other Chris- 
tian churches. That of St. James is considered 
by them as the most ancient, the most common, 
and that which contains the whole order of the 
Mass, to which all the others have a reference. 
I have already quoted some portions of it from 
the Greek version. 1 will now produce others 
from the Syriac. At the preparation of the sacri- 
fice, the deacon says : " O God who in thy mercy 
"didst accept the sacrifices of the ancient just, 
" accept also in thy mercy our sacrifice, and 
" vouchsafe to accept our prayers." Between 
" the words of institution, and those of invoca- 
tion, which are the same here as in the Greek ver- 
sion, the deacon announces the descent of the 
Holy Ghost upon the gifts, by a very striking 
admonition. " How terrible, O my brethren, 
" is this hour, how awful is this moment, when 



218 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" the holy and life-giving Spirit is about to des- 
" cend from the highest heavens, and bow down 
" upon this Eucharist placed in the sanctuary, 
" and sanctify it ; be ye therefore in fear and 
"trembling; keep yourselves in prayer; may 
" peace be with you, and the security of God, the 
44 Father of us all. Let us exclaim three times, 
" Kyrie eleisonP Then follows the invocation, 
the same as in the Greek version. The deacon 
makes afterwards a very beautiful prayer in a 
loud voice : 44 Bless us again and again, O my 
" God, by this holy oblation, by this propitiatory 
" sacrifice, which is offered to God the Father, 
" which is sanctified, completed, and perfected 
" by the descent of the Holy Ghost, the life- 
44 giver. ... Ye ministers of the Church, trem- 
" ble ; for you administer a burning fire : the 
" power which is given you is greater than 
" that of the Seraphim. Happy the soul who 
" presents herself with purity at this altar ! 
" For the Holy Ghost inscribes her name, and 
" carries it to heaven. Tremble deacons, at 
64 the sacred hour when the Holy Ghost descends 
44 to sanctify the body of those who receive him. 
44 ... . Be mindful of the absent, O my God ! 



CHAP, ill.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 219 

" take pity on us. Peace and repose to the souls 
" of the departed : pardon the sinners at the 
" day of judgment : those who are departed 
" and separated from us by death, O Christ 
" place their souls in peace, with the pious and 
44 the just : let thy cross be their support, thy 
" baptism their garment : let thy body and 
" blood be to them the guide to conduct them 
" to thy kingdom. " The deacon addressing 
himself afterwards to the people, says : " Boiv 
44 down your heads before the God of mercies, 
" before the propitiatory altar, and before the 
" body and blood of our Saviour/' At the frac- 
tion, and communion of the priest, it is always 
the body of Jesus Christ, which was broken and 
sprinkled with his blood ; the holy body, the 
life-giving body which he receives. The deacon 
administering it to the people, says: " My bre- 
" thren, the Church cries out to vou : receive 
" the body of the Son, drink his blood with 
" faith .... this is the chalice which our Lord 
" mingled upon the tree of the cross ; approach 
44 mortals, drink of it for the remission of your 
f sins/' 

The following is the invocation of the Syriac 



2&0 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

liturgy, called that of St. Maruthas, Metropolitan 
of Tagrit in Mesopotamia, and a friend of St. 
Chrysostom's ;* Have mercy on me, O my 
" God, who lovest mankind, send upon me, and 
" upon this holy oblation the Holy Ghost, who 
" proceeds from thee, who receives of thy Son 
" and perfects all the mysteries of the Church, 
" who reposes upon these oblations and sanc- 
" titles them." The people, " pray the 
priest : " Hear me, O my God the people 
thrice ; " Kyrie eleison the priest, raising his 
voice ; " that he may make this mere bread by 
" transmutation ( transmutet atque ejjiciat ) the 
" very same body which was immolated upon 
" the cross, the same body which rose again with 
" glory, and never knew corruption ! the body 
" which prepares life ! the body of the word 
" himself, God, of our Saviour Jesus Christ, for 
" the remission of sins (the people, " Amen,") 
" and the mingled wine which is in the chalice, 
" he may make by transmutation ( transmutet 
" et perjiciat J the very same blood which was 
" shed on the summit of Golgotha ! The same 
" blood which streamed down upon the earth, 
* From the Latin of Renaudot. 



CHAP. Ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 2*21 

" and purified it from sin ! The same blood 
44 which prepares for life, the blood of the Lord 
, 4 himself, of the word of God, and of our Saviour 
u Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins and 
" eternal life to those who shall receive him." 

At the offertory the priest says . # " May 
" Christ, who was immolated for our salvation, 
" and has commanded us to commemorate his 
" death and resurrection, may Christ himself 
44 receive this sacrifice presented by our un- 
" worthy hands !" And as he had desired the 
concurrence of the people, they answer : " May 
" the Lord graciously hear thy prayers, may he 
44 be pleased with thy sacrifice, and vouchsafe 
" to accept thy oblation, and honour thy priest- 
" hood V' The priest says : 44 May thy Holy 
44 Spirit come, O my God, and repose upon the 
" oblation of thy servants ; may he bless it, and 
44 sanctify it V* In this M. S. the prayers for 
the consecration are wanting ; but at the break- 
ing of the host, at the mingling of the species, 
the liturgy speaks only of the body and blood 
of Jesus Christ, the precious blood, the life-giving 

* Nestorian Liturgies — that called of the apostles, from 
the Latin of Renaudot. 



222 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt II 

body. At the communion, the deacon exclaims : 
" Let us all approach with trembling. 5 ' And 
again, "My brethren, receive the body of the 
" Son — the voice of the Church — and drink his 
" chalice with faith. " And in an act of thanks- 
giving, the priest says: " Christ our God, Lord, 
" King, Saviour, and giver of life, has graciously 
" made us worthy to receive his body and his 
" precious and sanctifying blood. " 

" With hearts rilled with fear and veneration,* 
" let us all approach to the mystery of the body 
" and precious blood of our Saviour ;. . . . and 
" now, O Lord, that thou hast called me to thy 
" holy and pure altar to offer thee this living 
" and holy sacrifice, make me worthy to receive 
" this gift with purity and sanctity.". . . . And 
again the priest says at the communion : " O 
" Lord, my God, I am not worthy, and it is not 
" right that 1 should receive thy body, and the 
" blood of propitiation, nor even that I should 
touch them ; but let thy word sanctify my soul, 
" and heal my body ?" And in the thanksgiving 
after communion, the priest says : " Strengthen 
" our hands which have been stretched out to 
* Liturgy of Nestorius of Malabar. 



CHAP, in.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 223 

" receive the Holy One .... repair by a new 
" life those bodies which have tasted thy living 
44 body . • . . God has filled us with blessings by 
44 his living Son, who for our salvation bowed 
44 down from the highest heavens, put on our 
44 body, and gave us his own, and mingled his 
" venerable blood with our blood, a mystery of 
" propitiation." 

After the words of institution, the deacon says 
aloud :* " Silence and trembling !" Then comes 
the invocation, which the priest commences thus, 
in an inclined posture ; " may the grace of the 
" Holy Ghost come down upon us, and upon 
44 this oblation ; may he dwell and infuse himself 
44 on this bread and on this chalice ; may he bless 
44 and sanctify them :. . . .may the bread, by the 
44 virtue of thy name, this bread, I say, be made 
44 the holy body of our Lord Jesus Christ : and 
44 this chalice, the blood of our Lord Jesus 
44 Christ." 

The invocation is expressed as follows :j* 44 O 
44 my God, may the grace of the Holy Ghost 

* Liturgy of Theodoras, of Mopsuestia, translated by 
Renaudot. 

+ Lit, oj NestoriuSy from the Latin of Renaudot. 



224 ANSWER TO THE [part 

tf come, and dwell, and rest on this oblation, 
44 which we are offering before thee ; may he 
44 sanctify it, and make it, that is, this bread and 
44 chalice, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus 
44 Christ, thou transmuting them ( transmutante 
44 ea te J, and sanctifying them, by the operation 
44 of the Holy Ghost." 

In all other parts, this liturgy of Nestorius, 
and the preceding one of Theodoras, resemble 
the first instituted by the apostles. 

At the oblation of the mass for the dead* we 
find these words : " Holy Father, lover of man- 
44 kind, receive this sacrifice in memory of the 
44 dead : place their souls among the saints in 
44 the heavenly kingdom : may thy divinity be 
44 appeased by this sacrifice, which we offer thee 
44 with faith, and grant the repose of their 
44 souls Hi At the canon, the priest says of our 
Saviour, 44 taking the bread in his divine, im- 
44 mortal, spotless hands, which have also the 
44 power of creating, he blessed it, gave thanks, 

44 broke it, &c O God send upon us, and 

44 upon these gifts thy holy, co-eternal and con- 

* Armenian Liturgy, from the Latin of Mr. Pidou de Saint 
Oloii, Bp. of Babylon, and the French of P. le Brun. 



chap, ill] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM, 0«25 

44 substantial spirit:'' [Here the deacon bows 
down at the corner of the altar :] 44 that thou 
44 mayest make this blessed bread the body of our 
44 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and holding 
the host over the chalice, he adds, 44 that thou 
44 mayest make this blessed bread and wine, the 
" true body and very flesh, and the true blood of 
44 our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, changing 
44 them by thy Spirit.". .The priest adores 
thrice, and kisses the altar, and from that time 
he does not any more raise his hands above the 
offerings. Now fixing his eyes upon them. . . . 
he adores them as God, and represents to him his 
desires with tears Towards the commu- 

nion, the priest adores, and kisses the altar ; 
taking the sacred body, he dips it entirely in 
the precious blood, saying : 44 O Lord our God 
44 .... we beseech thee to make us worthy to 
44 receive this sacrament for the remission of our 
44 sins." The priest with humility elevating from 
the holy table the sacred body and blood of our 
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, turns towards 
the people, and exhibits them, saying : 44 Let us 
44 taste in a holy manner of this holy, sacred, 
44 and precious body and blood of our Lord and 

Q 



226 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

44 Saviour Jesus Christ, who descending from the 
44 heavens is distributed among us." He says 
afterwards, 44 I confess and believe that thou art 
" the Christ, the Son of God, who didst bear the 

" sins of the world O Jesus Christ, my 

44 God I I taste with faith thy holy and life-giving 
44 body for the remission of my sins. O my God, 
u Jesus Christ, I taste with faith thy purifying 
" and sanctifying* blood for the remission of my 
44 sins/' Then making upon his mouth the sign 
of the cross, he says these words of St. Thomas 
the apostle ; 44 May the incorruptible body be 
" in me for life, and thy sacred blood for the 
44 propitiation and remission of sins !" Then 
turning towards the people with the chalice : 
44 Approach with fear, with faith, and com- 
44 municate in a holy manner." During the 
communion of the people, a canticle is sung 
with these words : 44 This bread is the body of 
44 Jesus Christ ; this chalice is the blood of the 
44 New Testament : the hidden sacrament is made 
44 manifest to us, and thereby shews himself to 
44 us ; here is Jesus Christ the Word of God, who 
44 is seated at the right hand of the Father — he is 
44 sacrificed in the midst of us," &c. 



chap. III.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 227 

VII. After the extracts you have now read, 
permit me, Sir, to conclude the subject of the 
liturgies by a two-fold supposition, which will 
personally concern you, inasmuch as it will 
place your existence about the year 256, under 
Decius. I will suppose then that in the middle 
of the third century, certain motives of curiosity 
or business had led you into different countries, 
and had afforded you opportunities of assisting 
at the divine worship. You would have found 
in the several countries, in substance, the same 
liturgy. At Rome, at Carthage, or Alexandria ; 
at Jerusalem, Ephesus, or Antioch ; at Corinth, 
or Athens ; in Spain, or in Gaul, you would 
have heard the same prayers recited, the same 
invocations, at least in signification, to obtain 
the change of bread and wine into the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ ; the same professions of 
faith in the real presence of the divine victim ; 
vou would have adored him upon the altar, re- 
ceiving him with your brother Christians ; and 
with them you would have derived from these 
sublime dogmas an angelic fervour, and senti- 
ments above the terrors of this world, a courage 

Q 2 



228 ANSWER TO THE Lpaut »'• 

unshaken and super-human in the fire of perse- 
cution, at the glare of the faggot, and the sight 
of the sword. 

I will suppose in the second place, that at the 
end of your travels, arriving in some great city, 
you fell in with some Christian congregation, 
which however would have been impossible at 
that period, where you heard some venerable 
ecclesiastic explain to the people that what was 
elsewhere called an unbloody sacrifice was no 
more than a pious chimera ; that the altar of 
the Christians was an altar without a victim ; 
that every thing there was in figure ; that the 
presence of our Saviour was only a fiction, since 
his body had been long ago in heaven, and could 
not at the same time be found upon earth ; that 
the change effected in the offerings by the 
Omnipotence of the Holy Ghost, consisted in 
making a religious emblem of a domestic ali- 
ment ; that after the consecration, the substances 
offered were what they had been before, literal 
bread and literal wine ; and that consequently 
the adoration of Catholicism was gross idolatry. 
What then would have been your sentiments ? 



CHAP. HI.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



229 



Allow me, Sir, to ask you : would you not have 
left this congregation with perfect horror ? 
Y/ould you not have fled with precipitation 
from such a preacher ? Doubtless you would 
from that time have been even more ardently 
attached to the doctrine of the universal Church. 
Well then, my dear Sir, what you would have 
done then, do, I beseech you, now. The ancient 
liturgies are still those of the Catholics ; your 
own is new, national, and discordant. The lan- 
guage of the supposed heterodox preacher is 
precisely that of the Rector of Long Newton. 
Both declaim against the faith of the primitive 
Church : both are at open war with the teaching 
of the apostles, with the oblation transmitted 
by them to the Church. Return, Sir, I conjure 
you, to the doctrine and practice of the beautiful 
ages of antiquity. It is not you alone, nor the 
laity only, to whom I now most solemnly appeal. 
I appeal to all those to whom 1 dedicated my 
Discussion Amicale; I appeal especially to the 
Rev. G. S. Faber, to the doctors of your univer- 
sities, to those of every communion, holding, like 
your own, opinions manifestly opposed to that 
apostolical tradition, which is imprinted on all 



230 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



the ancient liturgies, in characters uniform and 
indelible.* 

* I cannot too strongly recommend to my readers the very 
curious work of P. LeBrun, where all the liturgies, ancient and 
modern are exhibited. This work is indispensable for the 
young clergy, who are applying to theology in the universities 
of Oxford and Cambridge. I invite them to take with it 
the dissertation of Schelestat De disciplina arcani. In these 
two works they will find most solid and essentially necessary 
information on the history and doctrine of the primitive 
Church. 



chap. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



231 



CHAPTER THE FOURTH. 



GENERAL PROOF OF OUR DOCTRINE ON THE EUCHARIST 
FROM THE CATECHESES. 

Particular Proofs from the Fathers. 

I. Every one who has studied the monuments 
of tradition on the subject of the Eucharist, 
must have remarked a singular difference in the 
expressions of the Fathers, when they speak of 
the sacrament of the altar. Sometimes they ex- 
plain themselves with all imaginable clearness, 
on the reality of the presence of Jesus Ghrist 
under the species, and on the change of sub- 
stance. At other times they designate the gifts 
olfered, by the expressions of symbols, types, 
signs, figures, representations, or allegories of 
the body and blood of Jesus Christ. This diver- 
sity of language, occurs not only among different 
doctors, but often even in the same Father ; for 
example, in St. Chrysostom or St. Augustin. 
The Catholics with good reason attach them- 
selves to the passages of the former kind, while 
they give the most satisfactory explanation of 



232 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

the others. The Protestant sac r amen tarians 
build upon the passages of the latter kind, which 
suit their opinions ; and at the same time, glide 
hastily over those of the first description, which 
overthrow their system. Both parties agree 
that the Fathers are not to be accused of being 
contradictory to one another, and still less to 
themselves. But, as far as I know, neither 
Catholics nor Protestants have ever yet asked 
themselves the cause of this difference of lan- 
guage on the same subject ; Why the Fathers, 
after having spoken entirely in the sense of the 
real presence, appear in other places to express 
themselves in that of a jfigurative presence. It 
is however a duty to make such enquiry ; and 
this is the precise point to be investigated and 
cleared up, in order to dissipate the slightest 
cloud, and bring forth in the full blaze of day 
the true doctrine of the Fathers — the real belief 
of the primitive Church. 

II. The answer to this important question is 
by no means difficult ; and I am persuaded, 
Sir, that you have not arrived thus far, without 
foreseeing it yourself, without my suggestion. 
The Fathers, as you know, lived under the dis- 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. O33 



cipline of the secret, and observed it so strictly 
that they were ready to shed their blood, as 
were the faithful after their example, rather than 
violate it by betraying the mysteries ; and 
among others, that of the Eucharist. They 
could speak openly of it, without fear, to the 
faithful, either in their family circles, or in the 
church in discourses delivered before them ex- 
clusively : they were obliged to expose them 
with all possible clearness to the neophytes, 
previous to admitting them to communion and 
on the following days.* On the contrary, in 
presence of the unbaptized the secret was scru- 
pulously kept. And you will readily conceive, 

* "On the eve of the great day of Easter and of your rege- 
" neration, we shall teach you with what devotion you must come 
" forth from baptism, approach the altar, and partake of the 
" spiritual and heavenly mysteries which are there offered, that 
u your souls being enlightened by our instructions and discourses, 
" each one of you may know the greatness of the presents which 
" God gives him." (S. Cyr. ofjerus. Catech. IS.) " We shall 
" only speak now of things which cannot be explained before 
" catechumens, but which it is necessary nevertheless to lay open 
64 to those who have been recently baptized." ( St. Gaudentiusto 
the Neoph.) " In this paschal solemnity," said St. Augustin, 
( Serm. on the 5th day after Easter), " these first seven or eight 
" days are devoted to the instruction of the children^ (the newly 
"baptized) upon the sacraments." 



234 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

that if it were prohibited to confide the least 
portion to a single individual uninitiated, it 
must have been much more so to speak openly 
of the mysteries in writings intended for public 
circulation. " Row could it be allowed," says 
St. Basil, " to publish written explanations, 
" of what the uninitiated are forbidden to con- 
template ?" 

III. What then, in these days, has he to do, 
who would understand clearly the sentiments of 
the Fathers on the Eucharist ? What course 
will he take to attain his object ? It would be 
the height of folly to seek their belief in writings 
where they were not permitted to divulge it ; in 
those, for instance, which they published against 
the pagans and heretics of their times : or in 
discourses pronounced with open doors before 
catechumens and gentiles. Any sensible man 
wishing to learn in the school of the Fathers 
what has been revealed on the subject of the 
Eucharist, will open those instructions which 
they gave to the newly baptized. He will take 
his place, not among the catechumens, before 
whom they concealed the mysteries ; but among 
the neophytes, to whom it was a necessary duty 



chap. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 235 

to display them. These are, in the outset, the 
writings which any man of sincerity will con- 
sult, when desirous of knowing with certainty, 
the doctrine of the Fathers ; but the catecheses 
before all, and even them alone, if he would 
spare himself much labour and research. For 
with them, he is sure to discover what the 
Fathers believed, and what they taught : and 
by consequence, with them he may save himself 
all farther trouble. 

Nevertheless I would advise him to consult 
another kind of monuments, from which he 
will derive particular edification without any 
trouble, and a firmness in faith most valuable 
in the evil days in which we live. I allude to 
the liturgies, which are so evidently connected 
with the catecheses. In fact, what did these 
latter teach the neophytes ? They taught what 
passed at the altar. And what else do the 
liturgies describe ? Both then necessarily con- 
tain the same mysteries, the same doctrine, the 
same creed. What the catecheses put forth in 
theory, the liturgies exhibit in action. There 
are the principles, motives and reasons for be- 
lieving : here the sentiments of gratitude, love 



236 ANSWER. TO THE [p ARX H . 

and adoration which faith inspires, if a more 
extensive knowledge were desired, it might be 
found in the sermons preached before the faith- 
ful exclusively ; for then the orator felt no 
restraint in expressing himself openly, when- 
ever his subject led him to speak on the Holy 
Eucharist. 

IV. But at our distance from the primitive 
times, how are we, in these days, to distinguish 
among so many homilies and sermons, those at 
which none assisted but the initiated, from those 
attended by other persons ? How, after so 
many centuries, are we to understand, whether 
the audience was composed purely of the faith- 
ful, or was made up of the faithful and the pro- 
fane, attracted perhaps by the reputation and 
eloquence of the orator ? We shall be supplied 
in this case with certain rules by sound criticism. 
If the language of the sermon accords with that 
of the catecheses, if the preacher speaks of the 
Eucharist as openly as the catechist, we may 
conclude with certainty that the auditory was 
wholly Christian. But when the preacher pre- 
mises, like Theodoret in his first dialogue, that 
he shall express himself " in mystic and obscure 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 237 

" terms, because perhaps he is speaking before 
" persons uninitiated when he testifies, like 
St. Cyril of Alexandria, " a fear of discovering 
" the mysteries to the uninitiated — when he 
declares, like St. Clement of Alexandria, that he 
shall " endeavour to say certain things under a 
" veil, and to shew them, while he, in a manner, 
" is silent upon them or when he uses that 
expression, so common to S S. Chrysostom and 
Ausrustin : " the initiated understand me, the 
" initiated know it or finally, when he seems to 
use expressions contradictory to those which he 
has elsewhere employed before the faithful ; — 
then, and in all such cases, we are perfectly 
assured that there were some of the profane 
among his hearers. 

V. These preliminary observations will not 
appear to you, Sir, as I love to believe, inspired 
by prejudice ; but rather dictated by the spirit 
of impartial criticism : and if you are desirous 
of acquiring an exact and thorough knowledge 
of the primitive doctrine on the sacrament of 
our altars, you will doubtless seek out in the 
first place, the elementary discourses still ex- 
tant, for the instruction of the neophytes ; then 



238 ANSWER TO THE [part It. 

the ancient liturgies of the Christian churches, 
and finally the discourses composed exclusively 
for the faithful. As to the sermons addressed 
indiscriminately to Christians and others, as 
also those works intended for the public ; know- 
ing that the discipline of the secret required the 
mysteries to be concealed, you will not think of 
seeking for them in writings of that kind : and 
when you see your own divines attaching them- 
selves by choice to such works, and quoting pas- 
sages from them with self-complacency, you will 
say to yourself : " What can they mean by such 
" a method ? Why enquire of the Holy Fathers 
" their sentiments on the Eucharist, in circum- 
" stances in which they were obliged to conceal 
" them ? What they said at those times was 
" never intended by them to guide us in this 
" matter. To persist in taking them forjudges 
" contrary to their known intention, is wilfully 
" to deceive oneself and others." This is en- 
tirely my opinion. To seek to discover what 
the Fathers thought on the Eucharist, in writings 
where they were obliged to conceal their senti- 
ments ; and not in those where duty made it a 
law to expose them openly, is assuredly follow- 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



239 



iag a method totally opposed to the dictates of 
common sense.* 

VI. Open then with me the instructions ad- 
dressed to the neophytes ; read again the 
extracts which 1 shall point out to you ; and 
remark, if you please, their conformity in doc- 
trine with that of the liturgies. The venerable 
patriarch St. Cyril, addressing the neophytes of 
Jerusalem, thus expresses himself : j* "As then 
44 Christ, speaking of the bread, declared and 
44 said, this is my body, who shall dare to doubt 
44 it ? And as speaking of the wine, he positively 
44 assured us, and said, this is my blood, who 
44 shall doubt it and say, that it is not his 
blood ? » (Who ? Mr. Faber would reply to St. 
Cyril, I shall doubt it,) 44 Formerly at Cana in 
• 4 Galilee, Jesus Christ changed water into wine 
44 by his will only ; and shall we think it less 
44 worthy of credit, that he changed wine into 

* Here observe that your divines, when combating the real 
presence, transubstantiation, or the adoration of Jesus Christ 
in the blessed sacrament, never reason from the catecheses, the 
litnrgies, or the sermons preached before the faithful exclusively. 
At most they will quote a few insulated phrases from them, 
carefully concealing what precedes and follows them. You 
will soon see more than one example of this. 

i Catech. My stag. iv. No. 1 and 2. 



240 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part II. 



" his blood ? # , . . .Wherefore with all confidence, 
" let us take the body and blood of Christ. For 
" in the type or figure of bread, his body is 
" given to thee, and in the type or figure of wine, 
" his blood is given ; that so being made par- 
" takers of the body, and blood of Christ, you 
" may become one body and one blood with 
" him. Thus the body and blood of Christ 
u being distributed in our members, we become 
" Christophori, that is, we carry Christ with us ; 
" and thus, as St. Peter says, we are made par- 
" takers of the divine nature. f .... Wherefore I 

* After quoting thus far, the Rector stops short, and says 
in a note, page 68 ; "I have selected this passage, because, so 
"far as I know, it is the strongest which can be produced 
u from antiquity in favour of the Latin doctrine of transub- 
" stantiation ." What an appearance of candour ! How could 
it fail to deceive his readers ? He knows that the very contrary 
to what he says is the fact. For he sees in the same page, and 
he has seen in my book, the words I have cited in continuation ; 
and yet he has the effrontery to suppress them ! I blush to 
record so unworthy an artifice. How can a man pretending to 
prove to his countrymen the truth, conceal it thus wilfully from 
their sight ? I am at a loss for expressions, which, without in- 
curring impoliteness, might inflict well-merited correction on 
this shameful want of good faith. I defy any one, and above 
all, the champion of figure and moral change, to express tran- 
substantiation more clearly than St. Cyril does, in the words 
Mr. Faber lias so artfully suppressed. 

■f Catech. MysU No. 3. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 241 

" conjure you, my brethren, not to consider them 
" any more as common bread and wine, since 
" they are the body and blood of Jesus Christ 
" according* to his words ; and although your 
" sense might suggest that to you, let faith con- 
" firm you. J udge not of the thing by your taste, 
" but by faith assure yourself, without the least 
" doubt, that you are honoured with the body 
" and blood of Christ. This knowing, and of this 
" being assured, that what appears to you bread, 
ff is not bread, but the body of Christ, although 
" the taste judges it to be bread; and that the 
" wine ivhich you see, and which has the taste 
" of wine, is not wine, but the blood of Christ "* 
And in the succeeding catechesis, where he de- 
scribes the liturgy of St. James, in use in his 
time in Jerusalem, St. Cyril prescribes the man- 
ner of receiving the chalice, in these words : 
" After having thus received the body of Jesus 
" Christ, approach to the chalice of his blood, 
" not extending your hands, but bowing in an 
" attitude of homage and adoration, and answer- 
" ing — Amen."-\ 

* Catech. MysL No. 6-9. 
t Catech. Nyst. v. No, 22. This adoration is the same 
R 



242 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

VI. St. Ambrose said to those about to par- 
take of the sacred mysteries ; " Water flowed 
" from a rock for the Jews ; but for you, the 

" blood of Jesus Christ himself flows But 

" you may say : I see somewhat else ; how do 
" you assert that I shall receive the body of 

" Christ ? — This remains to be proved 

" Moses held a rod ; he cast it on the ground ; 
"and it became a serpent.... If now the 
" blessing of men was powerful enough to 
" change nature, what must we not say of the 
" divine consecration, when the very words of our 
" Lord operate ? For that sacrament, which 
" you receive, is accomplished by the word of 
" Christ.* .... The word of Christ which could 
" draw out of nothing what was not, shall it not 
" be able to change the things that are, into that 
" which they were not f For it is not a less 

which we have seen in the liturgies rendered to Jesus Christ, 
under the species, and consequently the adoration of latria. 

* According to Mr. Faber we should say: Moses knew 
how to change physically his rod into a serpent ; therefore 
much more can Jesus Christ change morally the bread into a 
figure of his body; which signifies in plain English — if Moses 
being only a man did what was greater, Jesus Christ, aforluri, 
can do what is less ! 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF R O M A N ISM. £43 

44 effect of power, to give new existence to things, 
" than to change the natures that were.* 
44 Was the order of nature followed, when Jesus 
" was born of a virgin ? Plainly, not. Then 
" why is that order to be looked for here ? It 
" was the true flesh of Christ, which was cruci- 
" fied, which was buried ; and this is truly the 
" sacrament of his flesh. Our Lord himself 
44 proclaims : this is my body. Before the bene- 
44 diction of the celestial words, the bread 
44 ( species ) is named ; after the consecration the 
44 body of Christ is signified. He himself calls 
44 it his blood. Before consecration it has ano- 
44 ther name ; afterwards it is denominated 
4 * blood. And you answer Amen, that is, it is 

* If the word of Jesus Christ could, out of nothing, pro- 
duce what before did not exist, why should it not be able, in 
certain circumstances, to substitute for the common use of 
bread, a distinction wholly religious ? Thus ought those to 
reason from the great miracle of the creatiou, who in the 
Eucharistic bread admit only the moral change of Mr. Faber. 
The absurdity of such reasoning is palpable. St. Ambrose after- 
wards compares the miracle of the production of Christ's body in 
the sacrament, with that of his birth from a virgin. While Mr. 
Faber admits the miracle of his birth, will he inform us where 
is the miracle of the production of his body in the sacrament ? 
This real and physical birth was certainly miraculous : but 
how can a moral and figurative production be so? 

11 2 



244 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" true. What the mouth speaks, let the internal 
" sense confess : what the words intimate, let 
" the affection feel. By these sacraments Christ 
" feeds his Church, and by them is the soul 
" strengthened. It is a mystery which you 

ought to keep carefully within yourselves. . . . 

for fear of communicating it to those who are 

unworthy of it, and of publishing its secrets 
" before infidels, by too great levity in speak- 
u ing. Therefore you must watch with great 
" care .... in order to keep .... the fidelity of 
" your secret."* 

VIII. St. Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, will 
repeat to you what he said to his newly -baptized 
Christians : " Among all those things which are 
" marked out in the Book of Exodus, on the 
" celebration of the Passover, we shall only now 
" speak of such as cannot be explained before 
" the catechumens, but which it is nevertheless 
" necessary to make knoion to those who have been 
" newly baptized. In the shadows and figures 
" of the ancient passover, they did not kill one 



* I ask again in this place — where is the mystery, and the 
necessity of keeping any secret in the system of figure and 
moral change ? 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 245 

44 lamb only, but several, one in each house • 
" because one alone would not have sufficed for 
" all the people, and because this mystery was 
" only the figure, and not the reality of our 
" Lord's passion. For the figure of a thing is 
44 not the reality, but only the image and repre- 
" sentation. But now, when the figure has 

" ceased, the one that died for all, immolated in 
" the mystery of bread and wine, gives life 
" through all the churches, and, being conse- 
44 crated, sanctifies those that consecrate. This is 
44 the flesh of the Lamb, this is his blood : for the 
" bread that came down from heaven said : the 
" bread, which I shall give you, is my flesh for 
44 the life of the world. His blood is rightly ex- 
" pressed by the species of wine, because when 
44 he says in the gospel, / am the true vine, he 
" sufficiently declares all wine, which is offered 
" in the figure of his passion, to be his blood. 
" And he who is the Creator and Lord of all 
" natures, who produces bread from the earth ; 
" of the bread makes his own proper body, (for 
" he is able, and he promised to do it ;) and who 
44 of water made wine, and of wine his blood .... 
44 It is the pasch, he says, that is, the passover of 



246 ANSWER TO TJIE [part II. 

" the Lord ; think not that earthly, which is 
" made heavenly by him, who passes into it, and 
" has made it his body and blood* You ought 
" not then to reject the mysteries of our Saviour's 
" passion, by considering this flesh as if it were 
" raw, and this blood as if it were raw, as the 
" Jews did, nor say with them : how can he give 
" us his Jlesh to eat ? Neither ought you to 
" consider this sacrament as any thing earthly ; 
" but rather you should firmly believe that by 
" the fire of the Holy Ghost, this sacrament is 
" in effect what the Lord assures you that it is. 
" Believe what is announced to thee ; because 
" what thou receivest, is the body of that celestial 
" bread, and the blood of that sacred vine ;f for 
when he delivered consecrated bread and wine 
" to his disciples, thus he said: This is my body; 
" this is my blood. Let us believe Him, whose 
" faith we profess ; for truth cannot lie .... 
" Receive then, with us, with all the holy eager- 
" ness of your heart, this sacrifice of the passover 

* In what St. Gaudentius here tells you, you look in vain, 
I imagine, for the moral change of Mr. Faber. What follows 
is not in the least, more like it. 

\ In the system of a moral change, there is no living and 
celestial bread ; it is only earthy, terrestrial, and inanimate. 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 247 

" of the Saviour of the world , . . . whom we 
" believe to be himself present in his sacraments 
Do you think, Sir, that the Rector of Long 
Newton ever delivered a discourse like this to 
any that he prepared for the sacrament ? No ; 
no more than he did like those of St. Ambrose 
and St. Cyril. Such language can no where be 
found but in the mouth of a Catholic pastor. 

IX. St. Gregory Nazianzen, addressing his 
neophytes,* applies to the Eucharist the precepts 
of Moses on the celebration of the passover. 
" The law puts a staffinto your hand, that you 
" may not stagger in your soul, when you shall 
" hear of the death of God. Eat the body much 
" more without any hesitation, and drink the 
" blood, if you sigh after life. Never doubt of 
" what you hear concerning his flesh ; be not 
" scandalized at his passion. Keep firm, and 
" resolved not to let yourself be shaken by the 
" discourse of jour adversaries, nor carried away 
" by their efforts ; with your foot upon the 
" rock, and your body resting on the column of 
" temple, remain immoveable on the pinnacle 



* Second Disc, on the Passover. Orat. 45. 



248 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" which you occupy " How strange must lan- 
guage like this sound to the ear of Mi\ Faber ! 
What can these precautions and admonitions 
signify ? What hesitation or doubt could arise 
from a figurative manducation ? Is there any 
thing to terrify the imagination in a moral 
change ? Or any room for fear at the sight of 
literal bread ? 

X. It would be too long to quote the cate- 
chetical discourse composed by St. Gregory of 
Nyssa in forty chapters, for the instruction of 
his neophytes : I will however present you with 
a few passages. " When persons who have 
" taken poison, wish to destroy the mortal vio- 
" lence of the poison by a remedy which will 
" counteract it, this counter-poison must enter 
" into their bodies, as the poison did before it, 
" that it may diffuse and insinuate its virtue in 
" all parts, where the venom has penetrated. 
" In like manner, after taking the fatal poison 
" of sin, which destroys our nature, it is abso- 
" lutely necessary for us to take a remedy to 
" re-establish what was corrupted and changed, 
" that this powerful antidote, being within us, 
" may drive away and repair by its contrary 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 249 

" virtue, the evil which the poison caused in 
" our bodies by its malignity and contagion. 
" But what is this medicine ? That body, which 
" was shewn to be more powerful than death, 
" and was the beginning of our life ; and which 
" could not otherwise enter into our bodies, 
" than by eating and drinking."* The body 
then which we eat is that which suffered death, 
and triumphed over it by the resurrection. But 
would it not suffice, according to St. Gregory of 
Nyssa, to eat this divine body by faith ? Judge 
for yourself from the following words of that 
great prelate : " Now we must consider, how it 
" can be, that that one body, which so constantly, 
" through the whole world, is distributed to so 
" many thousands of the faithful, can be whole 
" in each receiver, and itself remain whole." A 
question totally absurd, if there were no man- 
ducation but by faith. Surely you have never 
either heard or read it in your Church ; and 
certainly it will never enter Mr. Faber^s mind 
to propose it to you. " The body of Christ, by 
" the inhabitation of the Word of God, was 



* Oral. Cutech. ch. 37. 



250 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" transmuted into a divine dignity : and so I 
" now believe, that the bread, sanctified by the 
" word of God, is transmuted into the body of 
44 Christ. This bread, as the apostle says, is 
44 sanctified by the word of God and prayer^ not 
44 that, like food, it passes into his body, but that 
44 it is instantly changed into the body of Christ, 
44 agreeably to what he said, this is my body , . . . 
44 By the dispensation of his grace, he enters, by 
44 his flesh, into the breasts of the faithful, com- 
44 mixed and contempered with their bodies, 
44 that by being united to that which is immortal, 
44 man may partake of incorruption. This is 
44 the gift which he bestows upon us, when, by 
44 the virtue of the benediction, he changes or 
44 transforms into his body the nature of the 
44 visible species. Virtute benedictionis in Mud 
44 corpus transelementatd eorum quce apparent 
44 natural These are expressions which would 
appear to me very strong, if I beheld in the 
Eucharistic bread nothing more than a simple 
transposition from the kitchen to the Lord^s 
table, and from the commonest use, a religious 
change or emblem. In truth, Mr. Faber must 
be greatly scandalized at the doctrine taught 



chap. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 251 

by the ancient Fathers of the Church to their 
neophytes ; or rather he ought to abandon his 
own and adopt theirs. 

XI. Let him listen attentively with us to the 
instructions of St. Chrysostom: "The statues 
" of sovereigns have often served as an asylum 
" to men who took refuge near them ; not be- 
" cause they were made of brass, but because 
44 they represented the figure of princes. Thus 
44 the blood of the Lamb saved the Israelites, not 
44 because it was blood ; but because it pre- 
" figured the blood of our Saviour, and an- 
44 nounced his coming. Now therefore if the 
44 enemy perceived, not the blood of the figura- 
" the Lamb marked upon our doors, but the 
44 blood of the truth shining in the mouths of the 
"faithful, he would much more speedily depart 
44 from them. For if the angel passed over at the 
44 sight of the figure, how much more would the 
44 enemy be terrified at the sight of the reality ! 
44 .... Consider with what food he nourishes 
44 and fills you : he himself is for us the sub- 
44 stance of this food." (Therefore the substance 
of bread is no longer there.) 44 He himself is 
44 our nourishment. For as a tender mother, 



252 ANSWER TO THE |rART II. 

" moved by natural affection, is eager to support 
" her child with all the abundance of her milk, 
" so Jesus Christ feeds with his own blood those 
" whom he regenerates." Could the real pre- 
sence be described or rendered by any compa- 
rison more touching and energetic ?* 

" Let us then, in all things, obey God.f Let 
" us not contradict him, even when what he tells 
" us appears repugnant to our ideas, and to our 
" sight. Let his word be preferred before our 
" eyes and our thoughts. Let us apply this 
" principle to the mysteries. Let us not regard 
" what is exposed to our sight, but rather his 
" word. For that is infallible, whereas our 
" senses may deceive us. Since then the word 
" has said ; this is my body, let us obey, let us 
" believe, and behold this body with the eyes of 
" the soul. For Jesus Christ has given us 
" nothing sensible ; but under sensible things, 
" objects which are only discernible by the 
" spirit. For if you were without body, the 
" gifts which he has given you would have been 

* Horn, to the neophytes^ and nearly the same in a homily 
on St. John, in the 60th to the people of Antioch. 
+ Horn. QQth) to the people of Antioch* 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. <253 

" simple ; but because your soul is united to a 
44 body ; under sensible thing % he presents you 
" such as are not sensible. How many persons 
" are heard to say : 1 would willingly behold 
44 his figure, his shape, his attire ! But thou 
" seest him, thou touchest him, thou receivest 
44 him into thy breast. Yet thou desirest to see 
44 his garments. He gives himself to thee, not 
" to be looked on only, but to be touched, to be 
" eaten, to be admitted into thy breast / . . . . 
" The treason of Judas, the ingratitude of those 
44 who crucified him made the most holy body 
44 of our Lord suffer death ; and thou, dost thou 
44 receive him with a soul impure and defiled, 
44 after receiving from him so many favours ? 
44 For not content with becoming man, with 
44 suffering ignominies, he would also mingle 
44 himself and unite himself with thee, so that 
44 thou mightest become one same body with 
44 him, and not only by faith, but effectively and 
44 in reality." Do you hear any thing like this, 
Sir, in your churches ? Do your preachers use 
any such language ? They tell you that you 
receive Jesus Christ by faith only ; and St. 
Chrysostom teaches that we receive him not 



254 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt II. 

only by faith, but in effect and reality. Listen 
yet farther, I pray you, to the admirable orator 
of Antioch. " How pure then ought he to be 
" who partakes of such a sacrifice ! Ought not 
" the hand dividing this flesh to be more resplen- 
" dent than any ray of the sun ? The mouth 
" which is rilled with this spiritual fire, and the 
" tongue which reddens with this most tre- 
" mendous blood ? Think by what an honour 
" thou art distinguished, at what kind of table 
" thou art made a partaker. What the angels 
^ tremble to behold, and do not indeed dare 
" freely to look upon on account of the splen- 
" dour which blazes forth from it, with this we 
" are fed, to this we are united, and are made one 
" body and one flesh of Christ. Who shall speak 
" the power of the Lord, and make all his praises 
" heard ? What shepherd feeds his sheep with 
" his own blood ? Shepherd do I say ? There 
" are even many mothers who after the pains of 
" child-birth, deliver their children to other 
" nurses. But this he would not permit ; but 
u feeds us himself with his own blood, and unites 
" us with himself in every thing." 

" He who did these things at that time, at that 



CHAP, iv.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 255 

u supper, is the same who performs them now. 
" We hold the places of his ministers, but it is 
" He himself who sanctifies and changes them" 
Here, Sir, you recognise the language of the 
catecheses, and the liturgies ; these are in the 
same terms the very mysteries which they con- 
cealed from the uninitiated : therefore there 
were none in the audience whom St. Chrysostom 
here addressed. To what class of the faithful 
was he speaking ? Hear what he says : 

" 1 say these things to those who communi- 

" cate, and to you who minister And 

" thou O laic, when thou beholdest the priest 
" offering, do not consider the priest doing this, 
. " but the hand of Christ invisibly extended. For 
" he who has done more, that is, placed himself 
" upon the altar, will not disdain to present you 
" his body." 

We have none of those dogmatical instructions 
extant, which undoubtedly St, Augustin gave to 
his neophytes between their baptism and their 
communion ; " in order" says Hesychuis, " to 
" make them sensible of the greatness of the gifts 
" which God was about to bestow upon them, and 
* preserve them from the ignorance of which 



256 ANSWER TO THE [part Ii. 

" those are guilty, who partake of the body of 
" Jesus Christ without knowing that it is in truth 
" the body of Jesus Christ" We have several of 
his discourses to the newly baptized, to whom he 
explains the dispositious which they ought to 
bring to the holy table, the moral significations 
or relations between bread and wine, and the 
mystical body of our Lord. Sometimes how- 
ever he introduces the Eucharistic dogmas ; and 
among others, in the following passage : "I en- 
" gaged to deliver a discourse to you who have 
" been baptized, to explain to you the sacra- 
" ment of the altar, which you now behold, and 
" of which you have been partakers this last night. 
" You ought to understand what you have re- 
" ceived ; what you are about to receive ; and 
" what you ought every day to receive. The 
" bread which you behold on the altar, sanctified 
" by the word of God, is the body of Christ. 
" That cup — that which the cup contains, sanc- 
" titled by the word of God, is the blood of 
" Christ." Here we have the doctrine of the 
real presence which St. Augustin recals to the 
minds of the neophytes, who must already have 
known it, because they had communicated on 
the preceding night. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 257 

Xll. The quotations you have read, though 
by no means numerous, will suffice. One tiling 
appears to me absolutely incontestable : — in the 
primitive ages there were no churches without 
catechumens, and consequently none without 
catechistical instructions. It was necessary to 
teach the religion to those adults who signified 
a wish to embrace it. They could not be ad- 
mitted to baptism and the other sacraments, 
until they had been duly instructed in their 
greatness and importance. It was therefore ne- 
cessary to make them pass through a course of 
preparatory proofs, to be assured of their pro- 
gress, dispositions and piety ; to make them 
sensible of the necessity of grace, and describe 
its advantages, previous to opening its channels 
in their favour. These various instructions 
formed what we call catecheses. It is clear that 
it could no more be permitted to commit them 
to writing than the liturgies, as long as the dis- 
ciple of the secret was in vigour. Since both 
contained the same doctrine and the same mys- 
teries, the danger of betraying them would have 
been the same, if by writing they had been ex- 
posed to the risk of falling into the hands of 

s 



258 ANSWER TO THE [PART II. 

infidels. Thus we see St. Cyril of Jerusalem 
take the precaution of placing at the beginning 
of his catecheses an admonition of the most 
serious character, and almost like that with 
which the ancient author of the apostolic consti- 
tutions terminates his liturgy and performance. 
We may therefore consider it as certain, that in 
ancient times all the churches had their cate- 
cheses, which were learnt and explained from 
memory, like the liturgies, and for the same 
length of time. Of those written in the fifth 
century, very few have come down to us. But 
by the small number which Providence has pre- 
served for us, we may fairly judge of all the 
rest ; in the same manner as we judge of the 
liturgies lost, by those still in our possession. 
These that remain agree with each other in every 
thing essential, and must equally have resembled 
those which are unknown to us. For whatever 
was the difference of language, expressions and 
ceremonies of the various countries, they were 
every where employed to arrive at one and the 
same end, the one only sacrifice of the new law. 
This reasoning is of itself applicable to the cate- 
cheses, which having been only used to explain 



cil\v. IV.] DiFFIGULTIEiS OF ROMANISM. O $Q 

the Christian doctrine, must ever have traced 
out the same dogmas, the same precepts, under 
whatever form, and in what language soever 
they were expounded. The experience of our 
own times will suffice to convince us of this. 
Collect any number of Catholic catechisms, 
written in English or Celtic, French, German, or 
Portuguese, Spanish, Greek, or Latin, or any 
idiom spoken upon the globe : compare them 
with each other, and you will find perfect uni- 
formity in all dogmatical points. Then com- 
pare them with the remains of antiquity ; and 
you will find them in perfect conformity in all 
the essential articles. But to any man of learn- 
ing it will be unquestionable that the catecheses 
of SS. Cyril and Ambrose, the two Gregories, 
SS. Gaudentius, Chrysostom and Augustin, 
were the same in every thing essential, with all 
that were known to the primitive Church. It is 
incontestable that the catecheses of the first 
three centuries were in substance conformable to 
those of the 4th and 5th, in which we read the 
same dogmas, the same doctrine which we read 
in our own — the altar, sacrifice, presence of the 

victim, change of substance and adoration. 

s 2 



260 ANSWER TO THE [PAUT II. 

Therefore these dogmas were transmitted to the 
Church by the apostles ; and consequently they 
were revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ. In a 
word, all Catholic catechisms agree on the 
Eucharistic dogmas with those of the 5th and 
6th centuries. But these latter necessarily 
agreed on the same points with the catechisms 
of the first three centuries. Therefore ours 
agree equally with them ; and our doctrine on 
the Eucharist is primitive and apostolical. Or 
again ; since the Rector is so fond of the syllo- 
gistic form — the catecheses of the first three 
centuries certainly agreed with those of the 4th 
and 5th on the subject of the Eucharist. But 
ours a«ree with these latter on the Eucharist. 
Therefore ours agree with the primitive cate- 
cheses. The major and minor are incontest- 
able, after all that I have thus far written 
upon the Eucharist : and the consequence re- 
sults inevitably from the well-known axiom: 
Qiue sunt eadem uni tertio, sunt eadem inter 
se. Therefore the argument is incontest- 
able. 

XIII. To the authority of the catecheses, and 
to the arguments which they had suggested to 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 261 

me in my Discussion Amicale, what reply does 
Mr. Faber make ? The same which he had made 
to me on the discipline of the secret, and on the 
liturgies ; little, or rather nothing, that can de- 
serve notice. I had asked, and 1 here ask again, 
how the Church could have prescribed such 
rigorous secrecy on a thing so simple as a figu- 
rative manducation ? I had asked, and I here 
repeat the demand, how the Church, if she only 
admitted a moral change in the bread and wine, 
came to invoke in her liturgies the descent of the 
Holy Ghost upon the oblations, " in order to 
u change ihem and transform them into the body 
" and blood of Jesus Christ ?" How it was that 
she commanded the faithful to adore Him in the 
sacraments, particularly at the moment of the 
Holy Communion ? I had asked, and 1 now ask 
again, how the Fathers, if they beheld nothing 
in the bread but some type, or emblem, or sign 
of Jesus Christ absent, could have said in their 
instructions to those newly baptized, that what 
was bread before consecration, became after it the 
body of Jesus Christ ; that it was to be received 
as such, whatever it might appear to the senses ; 
because it is just and reasonable to depend 



26*2 ANSWEIt TO THE [part If. 

on tlie word of the God-man, rather than on a 
judgment founded on the testimony of the sight 
and taste ? I defied and I again defy any one to 
produce a single dogmatical instruction from 
the first five centuries, in which the catechist 
teaches the newly-baptized, that after the conse- 
cration, the bread and wine remain essentially 
what they were before ; that the invocations of 
the Holy Ghost have no other object but to 
obtain a moral change of the bread and wine, 
and to transfer them from common use to a reli- 
gious destination ; or that bread and wine, 
which were figures of the body and blood of 
Jesus Christ in the Old Testament, are so in the 
same sense in the New ; or that the body of 
Jesus Christ, being in heaven, cannot be here 
below ; and that consequently the adoration 
paid to Jesus Christ in his sacrament would be 
gross idolatry. To all these demands, what has 
Mr. Faber replied ? He appears not even to 
have perceived them ; he takes no notice of them, 
but loses himself in conjectures quite foreign to 
my queries. He endeavours to counteract the 
incontestable proofs of the secret, the liturgies 
and the catecheses, by certain testimonies from 



CHAP. IV.J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 

the Fathers, which he might have multiplied 
without any more advancing his cause, if he had 
been inclined to draw from the source which 1 
had myself pointed out to him, These passages 
are for the most part, taken from writings pub- 
lished against the Jews and Pagans, or from 
homilies pronounced before the uninitiated, hi 
such circumstances, the Fathers not being 
allowed to express themselves clearly, consi- 
dered the eucharistic bread and wine in their 
relation to the senses, and denominated them 
types, emblems, images, allegories, figures, and 
sacraments, without adding that these visible 
appearances covered the body and blood of 
Jesus Christ ; which would have been at once 
discovering and be raying the secret.* 

* Oti this occasion the Rector does me the honour to ex- 
press himself as follows : " 1 have rarely met with a more sin- 
" gular experiment upon the presumed obtuse intellect of a 
44 simple laic, than this which has been adventured by the 
" learned Bishop of Aire. An acknowledged symbol or image 
" of a thing, if we may credit a very able divine of the Latin 
44 Church, may be at once both a symbol of the thing in question, 
44 and yet the identical thing itself which it is employed to 
44 symbolize ! pp. 131 and 132. To imagine, that a man of the 
44 bishop's superior attainments could himself admit such a tissue 
44 of rhetorical absurdities, .... is perfectly out of the ques- 



264 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART II. 



XIV. I will afford you, Sir, satisfactory proof 
of what I advance, by giv ing you to understand 
more exactly than Mr. Faber has done, the prin- 
cipal passages quoted by him. The two first 
w hich I shall bring forward, are from St. Clement 
of Alexandria and Theodoret, who both give us 
notice that they are obliged to conceal their sen- 
timents on the subject of the mysteries. Since 
their pens were guided by this principle, you 
will doubtless conceive, Sir, that it would be 
unreasonable to look in their writings, for a 
clearness of expression on the eucharistic dog- 
mas, which they themselves inform us that they 
professedly avoid.* 

" tion." P. 134. Undoubtedly these are absurdities palpable 
enough; and such as I could not have imagined entering into 
any man's head. The Rector would make it appear that he 
has seen them in my book. I can assure you, on my side, that 
such are only to be found in The Difficulties of Romanism. 
That Mr. Faber should have been able to conceive them, and 
pursue them through four consecutive pages of dulness, is a feat 
of strength, of which I should not have imagined him capable, 
or a delirious illusion of which I charitably lament to find him 
susceptible. 

* Tertullian is of this number : I have quoted testimonies 
enough from him on the secret of the eucharistic mysteries. 
St. Cyprian, in the passage brought forward by Mr. Faber, says 
nothing more than we ourselves should say. It is astonishing 
to sec the Hector claiming for his side St. Cyril of Jerusalem ; 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 265 

St. Clement of Alexandria. 

XV. 44 I pass over several things, fearing to 
u commit to writing what 1 was afraid to say, 
u and because I fear that those who may read 
" these writings, may take my words in a wrong 
" sense, and fall into error, and 1 may be ac- 
" cused, according to the proverb, of putting a 
" sword into the hands of children for their de- 

" struction There are certain things 

" which the Holy Scriptures will shew me, 
" although they are not openly expressed. 
44 There are others, upon which they will insist. 
" There are others in fine, which they will only 
" touch upon slightly : but they will endeavour 
44 to speak them, while they conceal them, and 
44 to shew them while they keep silence."* 

What is most remarkable in the quotations 
here opposed to us by Mr. Faber, is the rare and 

such boldness is perfectly astounding. It is true, however, that 
at page 114 he quotes those words of his which I reproached 
him with suppressing in the place, where candour and equity 
called upon him to bring them forward. For the rest, he is 
satisfied at p. 114, that they would appear indeed to establish 
transubstantiation. Having said this, he quits the perplexing 
St. Cyril, and goes off to another more accommodating. 
* Strom, liber !. 



266 ANSWER TO THE [part If. 

particular candour which has presided over their 
arrangement. He presents them in a line, one 
immediately following the other. It is true, the 
references at the end of each, might sufficiently 
admonish the attentive and practised reader. 
But the greater portion not being of this descrip- 
tion, must imagine that the texts are connected, 
and all come together in the originals. Yet this 
is by no means the case. Between the first and 
second, I reckon ten lines : between the second 
and third, tifty pages ; between the third and 
fourth, a page and a half. Here then we have 
sentences detached from their proper places, and 
artfully reported side by side, so as to present a 
meaning sufficiently connected and natural. 
What makes the illusion pass off still better, is 
that the sentences are found connected by the 
conjunctive adverbs for or then, as if they were 
proof or consequence of the preceding phrase. 
No doubt you would have suppressed them. 
Mr. Faber has judged it more useful to preserve 
them : his intention is manifest. In the first 
text, he translates autem by therefore ; in the 
second, St. Clement says, 44 Ne quis vero alienum 
44 existimet quod nos sanguinem Domini lac allc- 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 267 

44 gorice dicamus, anrion vinum quoque allegorice 
" dicitur P Qui lavat inquit, in vino vestem suam, 
" et in sanguine uvce veslimentum suum." (Gen. 
49.) Mr. Faber translates thus : " Nor let any 
" one think that we speak strangely, when we 
" say, that milk is allegorically called the 
" blood of the Lord : for is not wine likewise 
44 allegorically called by the very same ap- 
44 pellation ?" p. 75. And I translate word for 
word as follows : 44 But lest any one should 
44 think it strange that we call the blood of the 
44 Lord allegorically milk, is it not also allegori- 
44 catly called wine ? 4 Who washeth/ it says, 
44 4 his robe in wine, and his garment in the blood 
44 of the grape." \ Ask the Rector, if you 
please, why he abruptly cuts the passage short, 
by retrenching the proof from Genesis. I will 
give you the reason presently. 44 The scripture 
44 then," continues he fiercely, as if these two 
passages followed each other connectedly, al- 
though they are fifty pages asunder ! St. Cle- 
ment proves by the text from Genesis that wine 
was there a figure of the blood of Jesus Christ. 
Mr. Faber, who, by the expression, 44 the scrip- 
44 ture then," leaves us to conclude that it was 



268 ANSWER TO THE [ PAIVX u> 

in the scripture, and perhaps even in the New 
Testament, makes it appear as if he did not see 
the text from Genesis. Let us leave him to 
argue at his ease, with his suppressions and con- 
junctions ; and let us conclude from the very 
passage objected by him that wine having been 
in the Old Testament a figure of the blood of 
Jesus Christ, was to become really his blood in 
the New Testament, which has fulfilled and rea- 
lized the figures of the Old. 

You have seen Mr. Faber suppressing the 
text from Genesis : now you shall see him making 
us some amends by shewing in the fourth quo- 
tation that he knows equally well how to add 
as well as suppress, when it will serve his pur- 
pose, as in these words ; " the consecrated liquor 
^ therefore consecrated, and therefore are his 
own exclusively. He has not taken them from 
St. Clement, but from his own head. 1 cannot 
help observing that all this petty contrivance to 
adapt St. Clement of Alexandria to his own ends, 
discovers a deep fund of cunning in the author, 
which will cause less surprise in England than 
elsewhere. 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 269 

Theodoret. 

XVI. In his first dialogue, lie introduces Or- 
thodoxus expressing himself as follows : " An- 
" swer me, if you please, in mystical and ob- 
" scure words : for perhaps there are persons 
" here, who are not initiated in the mysteries. 
" Er artistes : I shall understand vou, and an- 
" swer you in the same view." And further on, 
the same character says : 44 You have clearly 
44 proved what you desired, though in mystical 
44 words." 

The Rector of Long Newton seems never able 
to represent things as they really are ; either 
he suppresses, or he adds, or gives a sense to 
terms which they cannot have. He has passed 
over in silence the above extract from the first 
dialogue, and half of what you shall now read 
from the second. — 44 Eranistes : Tell me there- 
44 fore ; what do you call the gift that is offered 
44 before the priests invocation ? Orthodoxus : 
44 This must not be said openly ; for some may 
44 be present who are not initiated. Eran : 
44 Answer then in hidden terms. Orth : We call 
44 it an aliment made of certain grains. Eran : 
44 And how do you call the other symbol ? Orth : 



270 ANSWER TO THE [part ii. 

" We give it a name that denotes a certain 
" beverage.* Eran: And after the consecration 
44 what are they called ? Orth. The body of 
" Christ, and the blood of Christ. Eran : And 
" yon believe, that yon partake of the body and 
" blood of Christ? Orth. So I believe. Eran : 
4 - As the symbols then of the body and blood of 
" Christ were different before the consecration 
44 of the priest, and after that consecration are 
44 changed ; in the same manner we (Eutychians) 
" say that the body of Christ after his ascension, 
" was changed into the divine essence. Orth : 
44 Thou art taken in thy own snare ; for, after 
u the consecration, the mystical symbols lose not 
" their proper nature : they remain in the shape 
44 and form of the former substance, to be seen, 
44 and to be felt, as before ; but they are under- 
44 stood to be what they have been made ; this 
44 they are believed to be ; and as such they are 
44 adored. The reasoning of Orthodoxus is 

* Do you remember, Sir, that at p. 115 the Rector main- 
tains, in spite of what he quotes from St. Cyril, that the change 
of substance had nothing to do in the mysteries: not even as 
" the very smallest and least important secret ?" 

+ In this passage three small artifices are to be charged on 
Mr. Faber. 1st, he carefully avoids quoting the words of the 



CH.u\ IV.} 1)1*' F JCULT1ES OF ROMANISM. 271 

not that attributed to him by the Rector. Thou 
art taken, says he, in thy own snare: there is 
certainly a change in the bread, but not in its 
sensible and outward nature: for it retains its 



first dialogue, and those of the second, which shew the embar- 
rassment of Theodoret, and his fear of betraying the secret, as 
also the agreement between the two speakers to express them- 
selves in hidden terms. He lets no part of them appear; but 
begins his quotation from the two final sentences. 2dly, he 
makes Theodoret say that the bread and wine retain after 
consecration their original substance ; page 140. Original is 
here unworthily substituted by the candid and impartial 
bachelor of divinity. Theodoret says former (^orspctf); a 
decisive word, which evidently supposes that a second substance 
has taken the place of the first, and thus authorises the more 
intelligible translation which I have given, and of which the 
Greek text is perfectly susceptible. 3dly, instead of as such 
then are adored^ the bachelor translates, venerated; without 
considering that the liturgies, St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, &c. 
tell us that after the consecration, they paid the supreme 
adoration oilalria y and therefore adored in the full energy of 
the word. And what did they adore? Certainly not the 
visible species, nor the substance of bread ; but the body of 
Jesus Christ concealed under the visible qualities of bread. 

It is amusing enough to compare in this place, Mr. Faber 
and Dr. Cosiu. We cannot but admire the dexterity of both. 
Dr. Cosiii more ready in expedients, suppresses without cere- 
mony the words, as such as Ihei) are adored: but Mr. Faber 
more considerate, instead of the word which annoys him, puts 
another which quite alters the sense. On which I have but one 
simple question to put to you ; which of these two worthies 
appears to you to exhibit the greater candour and good faith ? 



272 ANSWER TO THE [part m 

figure, its form, colour, taste, and all the qua- 
lities of its former substance (^dts/j^c.) Yet we 
conceive it to have become what it is made, the 
bodv of Jesus Christ, of which I told thee that 
we partake, and which consequently is essen- 
tially there present : we believe it to be there 
present, though invisible, and as such we adore 
it. This answer demolishes Eutychianism tri- 
umphantly. It shews that the bread is changed, 
not into the divinity, as Eranistes imagined ; 
but from its corporeal substance into the sub- 
stance of the body of Jesus Christ : in a word, 
both interlocutors admitted a real change in the 
Eucharist ; Orthodoxus, that of bread into the 
body of Jesus Christ, since otherwise he could 
not have partaken of that body in the sacrament ; 
Eranistes, that of bread into the divinity, be- 
cause as an Eutychian he acknowledged that 
only in Jesus Christ, since his human nature 
had been absorbed by his divine nature after his 
ascension. 

I allow, without difficulty, that Orthodoxus 
and Eranistes mutually kept their agreement. 
They had engaged to make use of obscure ex- 
pressions, and such their expressions are at first 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 273 

sight. But with some attention, those who are 
initiated in the mysteries, as they both were, 
can penetrate the hidden sense of their dialogues. 
Mr. Faber, who is not thus initiated, has read 
all, heard all, and understood all in a wrong 
sense ; like those who obstinately remained 
among the catechumens, who neither knew the 
motives, nor the objects of the discipline of the 
secret, and who in consequence had never as- 
sisted at the liturgy, nor the mystagogic cate- 
cheses, nor at the sermons delivered before the 
faithful exclusively. 

Besides, the metaphysics of former days had 
a language now no longer in use. For example, 
they attached to the words natura, substantia, 
««r»a, curie, a different sense from what we give 
to substance and nature. St. Peter Chrosologus, 
speaking of a body becoming glorious, says : 
ut hoc sit mutasse substantiam, non mutdsse per- 
sonam ; and St. Augustin alluding to the fall of 
man, says : per iniquitatem homo lapsus est a 
substantia in qua f actus est. We might further 
quote Aristotle on the word substance, as for the 
word nature; also Cicero, Virgil and Horace, 
who often use it for the qualities and properties 

T 



274 ANSWER TO THE [paut II. 

of beings. 44 Substance" says Tertuliian, " is 
" one thing, the nature of substance is another. 
" Stone and iron are substances, their hardness 
" is the nature of their substance : aliud est sub- 
" stantia, aliud natura substantia. Substantia 
" est lapis, ferrum ; duritia lapidis et ferri natura 
" substantice (Lib. de anima, c. 32.) Mr. 
Faber presents these words to his readers in 
their modern signification. But, if you please, 
let us appeal to the judgment of the celebrated 
Leibnitz. " Gelasius, the Roman pontirF, gives 
" us to understand that the bread is changed 
" into the body of Christ, whilst the nature of 
" the bread remains ; he means its qualities or 
" accidents. For in those days they did not ex- 
" press themselves with perfect precision and 
" metaphysical accuracy. In the same sense 
" Theodoret says, that in this change, which he 
" calls [xsTtzQoXr,, the mystic symbols are not de- 
" p rived of their proper nature." (Syst. Theol. 
p. 227.) The Orthodoxus of Theodoret explains 
himself in the same terms : " The bread and 
" wine lose not their proper nature ; they retain 
" their form, figure, and visible and palpable 
" qualities." The explanation of the word 



chap, iv.j DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 275 

nature once admitted, all difficulty vanishes in 
the passages from Gelasius and Theodoras 
quoted by the Rector. There only remains that 
kind of mysterious cloud thrown intentionally, 
and by mutual consent, between Orthodoxies 
and JEranisfes. Far from being surprised at 
meeting with this slight obscurity ; it would be 
surprising indeed if it were not met with, after 
they had given notice that they should thus 
obscure their discourse, in order to conceal the 
mysteries from the uninitiated. What appears 
to me here exceedingly unreasonable, and I may 
even say absurd, is to pretend in our days to 
discover clearly the doctrine of an author by 
those dialogues, in which he has forewarned us 
that he could only declare it under hidden 
terms. 

St. Chrysostom and St. A/tgustm. 

XVI!. These, as Casaubon acknowledges, have 
more than forty times declared their embarrass- 
ment in explaining the Eucharist in presence of 
the uninitiated. Every thing that they spoke 
to the faithful alone, they expressed themselves 

w ith energy in the Catholic sense. After what 

t 2 



278 ANSWER TO THE [ PA ut Ml 

I reported in my Discussion Amicale from these 
two great prelates, I should not have expected 
to find them among the authorities opposed to 
me by Mr. Faber. I cannot conceive that he 
could persuade himself that they were not both 
against him ; since to give them an Anglican 
appearance, he has been obliged to mutilate 
quotations, suppress phrases before and after, 
and mangle the passages unmercifully. I am 
aware that I here bring against him a serious 
charge : but it is one most easy to establish. I 
have only to restore the mutilated passages to 
their integrity. 

At page 76 Mr. Faber quotes a passage from 
the discourse of St. Chrysostom on the treason 
of Judas ; and like myself, he read in the same 
discourse the following words, which he has 
carefully withheld from his readers ; " When I 
" hear the body of Jesus Christ mentioned, I 
" understand what is said in one way, and the 

" infidel in another Although these un- 

" believers hear it spoken of, it does not seem as 
" if they heard it. But the faithful possess the 
" intelligence given by the Holy Ghost, and 
" know the virtue and the power of the things 



chAp. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 277 

" there concealed He that was present at 

" the last supper, is the same that is now present 
" and consecrates our feast. For it is not man 
" who makes the things lying on the altar become 
" the body and blood of Christ ; but that Christ 

" who was crucified for us He said : This 

" is my body : these words make the change." 
We find the same train of thought in his 83d 
homily on St. Matthew ; " We behold the order 
" of ministers ; but the sane ii fie r and changer 
" of them is himself."* Would Mr. Faber tell 
us that this change is no more than a moral 
change ? Would the intervention of Jesus Christ 
be necessary to operate a mere moral change ? 
Would not the power of his ministers suffice to 
give a pious destination to bread and wine ? 
Does not Mr. Faber do this by himself when he 

* I really pity your Bachelor of Divinity, when I find him 
picking out these words ; u for the Eucharist is a spiritual food," 
in order to turn St. Chrysostom against us, and against himself. 
Why did he not also select the following : u Go then to Bethle- 
" hem, to the house of spiritual bread ?" These expressions 
are quite Catholic ; we make use of them every day ; and in 
the mouth of St. Chrysostom they have the same sense as in 
ours : they mean that the spiritualized body of our Saviour is 
communicated to us to be the nourishment, not of our bodies, 
but of our souls, ut anima de Deo saginetur, says Tertullian. 
Therefore this nourishment is a spiritual food. 



278 ANSWER TO THE [ PAR , x . 

administers the sacrament to his parishioners ? 
But is not his moral change incompatible again 
with the following passages ? 

" Consider, O man ? the royal table is spread. 
" The angels serve it : the King himself is there 
" present : and dost thou remain in stupid indif- 
" ference ! Thy garments are defiled, and thou 
" dost not grieve ! But they are pure, you will 
" say. Then adore and communicate." (Horn. 
45.) " This body lying in the manger, the wise 

" men reverenced They came from dis- 

" tant lands, and adored Him with great fear 

" and trembling Thou dost not see him 

" in the manger, but on the altar Let us 

" then shew him a veneration far above that of 
" those barbarians." (Horn. 24.) " Go then to 
" Bethlehem, to the house of spiritual bread .... 
" provided however that you approach to adore, 
" and not to trample under foot the Son of God 
.... take care not to resemble Herod, and say 
like him, " that I also may go and adore Him ; 
" and go not to put him to death. .... " Let 
" us tremble to appear as supplicants and 
" adorers, and yet to shew ourselves the contrary 
" by our works." (Horn. 7 on St. Matt. 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 279 

content myself with quoting these few passages, 
because they can leave no doubt in any impartial 
mind on the sentiments of St. Chrysostom, and 
of the Church. The adoration alone, so forcibly 
required by the eloquent patriarch, utterly de- 
molishes the opinion of a figurative presence, or 
a moral change ; demonstrates the doctrine of 
the real presence, and by a further consequence, 
that of t ran substantiation. 

XVIII. I am perfectly astonished at the intre- 
pidity of Mr. Faber. He brings against me 
one of the discourses of St. Augustin, which I 
quoted in proof of our doctrines. And how does 
he set about it ? Still by the help of the same 
stratagem, which assuredly he would find most 
disreputable in any other. He selects two or 
three passages, and exhibits them detached from 
those which precede and follow. United in their 
proper order, they exclude the actual doctrine 
of the Church of England ; separately, they 
might appear to favour it. Let us place the 
passages together, and the illusion produced by 
their insulated appearance, will at once vanish. 
You have seen the same thing in St. Cyril of 
Jerusalem, and St. Chrysostom ; you si 5 all now 



280 ANSWER TO THE [part til 

witness it in St. Augustin. " But how adore 
44 the earth, when the scripture says positively, 
a the Lord thy God shalt thou adore P and yet 
" it says here, adore his footstool ?* But in ex- 
" plaining to me what his footstool is, he says : 
" the earth is my footstool " (Isaias Ixvi. v. 1.) 
" I hesitate in uncertainty ; I fear to adore the 
" earth, lest I find myself condemned by Him 
" who created the earth and the heavens. On 
" the other hand, I fear, if I do not adore the 
44 footstool of my God, because the psalm says 

" to me, adore his footstool In this per- 

" plexity, I turn towards Christ, because it is 
" He whom I seek here, and I find in what man- 
" ner the earth is adored without impiety, and 
" how his footstool is adored without impiety. 
44 For he took upon him earth from the earth ; 
" because flesh is from the earth, and he took 
" flesh from the flesh of Mary : and because he 
65 here walked in this flesh, even this same flesh 
44 he gave to us to eat for our salvation ; but no 
u one eateth this flesh, without having first adored 
44 it. By this we discover how the footstool of 
44 the Lord is adored ; and not only we do not 

* In Psalm, xcviii. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. £81 

" sin by adoring, but we even sin by not adoring 
" it. But is it the flesh that quickeneth? The 
" Lord even, in exalting this earth to us, informs 
" us, that it is the spirit that quickeneth, and 
" that the flesh projiteth nothing. Wherefore 
" in abasing yourself and in casting yourself 
" down before any earth, consider it not as 
" earth, but consider in it that Holy One, of 
" whom what you adore, is the footstool. For 

" it is for his sake that you adore it The 

" disciples thought it very hard to hear him 
" say ; unless you eat my flesh you shall not 
" have eternal life ; they understood it stupidly, 
" and conceived it carnally, imagining that he 
" was going to cut off pieces of his body, and 
" give to them : . . . . but our Saviour instructed 
" his apostles ; ( here begins Mr. Faber's quota- 
" tion J the words that I have spoken to you are 
" spirit and, life. Understand spiritually what 
" I have said. It is not this body which you see, 
" that you will eat ; nor that blood which they 
" will shed, who will crucify me, that you will 
" drink. I have commended to you a certain 
" sacrament ; spiritually understood it will give 
" you life : though it must be celebrated visibly, 



282 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" it must be conceived of as invisible. Exalt 
" ye the Lord our God, and adore his footstool, 
"for it is holy" Mr. Faber has thought it 
prudent to quote no more than the six or eight 
last lines of the text :* they serve as a commen- 
tary on the words which our Saviour had just 
spoken to his apostles. After the example of 
St. Augustin I will give a commentary, but a 
very short one, upon the same words. The flesh 
profiteth nothing, it is the spirit which quickeneth. 
Understand spiritually what I say to you. It 
is not this body, such as you see it, that you 
shall eat ; you feel shocked at the idea : but this 
body such as you do not see it. It shall be pre- 
sented to you under a certain sacrament, which 
1 have in view. Thus you shall eat it : and 
without that, you shall not have eternal life in 
you. Taken invisibly in a visible sacrament, it 
shall be to your souls a spiritual food, which 
you shall not take without having first adored it. 

* I must observe that in the translation, these words, as if 
he had said, — identical, twice — on the contrary — do not belong 
to St. Augustin, but to the inventive and fertile Bachelor of 
Divinity. They add to the text without any way increasing 
the difficulty. This is becoming an unfaithful translator to no 
earthly purpose. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 283 

XIX. The modern Church of England man 
no longer acknowledges the body of Jesus Christ 
in the sacrament : therefore he no longer re- 
ceives it there. For eating in imagination, in 
figure, in empty shadow, is after all, not eating. 
Hence he has suppressed the adoration. Where 
nothing is seen but material bread, to adore 
would be to commit idolatry. The Catholic 
confiding more in Jesus Christ, than in himself, 
believes in the word of his Saviour without hesi- 
tation, and in his invisible presence without 
comprehending it ; he adores him veiled be- 
neath the appearance of bread, receives and 
eats his body in reality ; certainly not in a raw 
and Capharnite manner, but heavenly and spiri- 
tual. For there is no other way of eating a 
body impalpable, invisible and spiritualized. 

XX. Mr. Faber would not fail to cry victory, 
if 1 were not to answer the objection suggested 
to him by the silence of Julian. As a last 
resource in a desperate cause, he calls to his aid 
that famous renegado " as an unexceptionable 
" witness" Proud of the imperial majesty on 
which he leans, he comes to us with the air and 
tone of triumph. Would not any one suppose 



284 ANSWER TO THE [part ii. 

that he had in his possession the grand work of 
that emperor against the Christian religion, and 
in defence of paganism ? Would not any one 
say that he had read it from beginning to end, 
when he is heard asserting in such an affirmative 
tone that Julian has not said a word about the 
real presence, and the change of substance ? 
Well Sir, would you wish to know how much 
truth there is in this boasted objection ? The 
truth is, that neither the Rector of Long New- 
ton, nor any one in the world possesses, or has 
read the work, in which he has thus blindly 
placed his confidence. It was composed by 
Julian and the philosophers who followed him 
into Persia, in that expedition which put an 
end to his projects, his reign and his life. Some 
have conjectured that it was divided into seven 
books, others, into three. We know no more of 
it now than those quotations from the first book, 
for which we are indebted to the refutation of 
them written by St. Cyril, of Alexandria, fifty 
years after the death of the apostate.* It may 

* " Fifty years after the death of the renegado, St. Cyril 
replied to a work which Julian wrote in three books against 
the Christian religion, of which the saint has preserved the 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 285 

be easily supposed that the author had deferred 

speaking of the Eucharist till the second or 

third book ; and then of course it would be no 

wonder to find nothing of it in the first. But 

farther: if it be insisted that he ought to 

have spoken of it in the first book; he may still 

have done so ; and no one can now prove that 

first .... We have no more of the work of Julian against the 
Christians, than what St. Cyril has quoted in order to refute it." 
Tillemont Hist, des Emp. 

" During this journey into Persia, Julian wrote his grand 
work against the Christian religion .... It was divided into 
seven books, or according to others, into three .... St. Cyril 
has preserved a great p u t of it, inserted in the reply which he 
afterwards made to it." Fleury Hist. Eccl. T. 4. " Julian 
u died before there was time to reply to his sophistry .... 
" Nothing would have been left us of them, if St. Cyril of 
Alexandria, having undertaken to refute them fifty years 
u afterwards, had not thus preserved a considerable portion." 
Le Beau Hist, dubas Emp. T. 3. u Julian wrote an elaborate 
" work against the truth of Christianity : of which some frag- 
" meats oaly have come to modern times." Rees' Cyclopedia. 
Art. Julian. 

" The elaborate work, which he composed amidst the pre- 
" parations of the Persian war, contained the substance cf 
u those arguments which he had long revolved in his mind. 
££ Some fragments have been transcribed and preserved, by his 
" adversary, the vehement Cyril of Alexandria; and they 
u exhibit a very singular mixture of wit and learning, of 
" sophistry and fanaticism." Gibbons Decline and Fall, 
chap, xxiii. Fabricius and Lardner have compiled fragments 
extant of Julian. 



286 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

he did not. AH we know of this book is from 
its refutation ; and we are very much inclined 
to think that St. Cyril would take great care 
not to give greater publicity to the raillery of 
Julian against the Holy Eucharist. How indeed 
could he have reported them, or could he have 
defended our dogmas, without attracting the 
notice and attention of the pagans to our mys- 
teries, and by such indiscretion inj ured the dis- 
cipline of the secret, as well as the precept of 
our divine Legislator ? This not merely a con- 
jecture thrown out at hazard : it comes from 
Julian himself ; hear what he says about bap- 
tism : " But this grave philosopher affects to 
" laugh at what ought rather to be to him a 
" source of self-congratulation : he is utterly 
" ignorant of the efficacy of the sacred water of 
" baptism ; he is pleased to ridicule what is the 
" most holy thing in the world ; and congratu- 
" late those who having believed in Jesus Christ, 
" have had the happiness to find a miraculous 
" water, which removes every stain, and has 
" cleansed them from head to foot. He adds 
" other insipid jokes, and old nurses' tales ; and 
" he says afterwards that this lustra! water is 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 287 

" without power, or virtue against bodily dis- 
44 eases. But know O wise and illustrious 
" teacher ! that we do not apply the virtue of 
" baptism to the cure of the body, nor to things 
" perceptible by the senses. The mystery of 
" Christ requires an intelligence, of which those 
" are not susceptible, who are plunged in 
" errors. It is faith which opens to us the 
44 entrance and knowledge of the divine mystery. 
" But in the fear of offending Jesus Christ, who 
" forbids us to give that which is holy to dogs, 
44 and to cast pearls before swine, by presenting 
44 to profane ears what ought to remain hidden, 
44 1 shall pass over all that requires a high and 
44 sublime intelligence/ < And after touching 
upon something of the power and miracles of 
our Saviour, he adds : 44 1 could say much more, 
44 and should have very certain proofs to pro- 
44 duce ; if I were not apprehensive of exposing 
44 myself to profane ears. For people generally 
44 deride what they do not understand ; and the 
44 ignorant, not even perceiving the weakness of 
44 their minds, despise what they ought most to 
44 admire." 

You see then, Sir, that St. Cyril does not 



288 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

inform you of all that Julian had written against 
baptism. His replies are fully sufficient to 
refute the feeble objections which he reports. 
There must have been others, which he deemed 
it more prudent to pass over than to publish. 
He clearly alludes to them when he talks of the 
" insipid jokes, and old nurses* tales," which 
he passes over for fear of infringing the law of 
secrecy. We know nothing of these ; we should 
not even suspect their existence, if St. Cyril had 
not made the observations which you have just 
read. Are we then to conclude, because he is 
silent upon the Eucharist, that Julian had not 
turned its dogmas into ridicule? No, Sir, the 
silence of that great patriarch is no proof that 
the emperor had been silent. If the Christian 
apologist considered himself obliged to be so 
reserved on the subject of baptism, how much 
more ought he to have thought himself so bound 
on the dogmas of the Eucharist, the sublimity 
of which would have been much more open to 
the derision of the profane ! Besides, what 
passed at the altar in the assemblies of the Chris- 
tians, was, as you know, what the pagans most 
eagerly sought to discover, and even to extort 



cuap. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 289 

by punishmeuts ; and it was also what the faith- 
ful concealed with the greatest care, perseverance 
and intrepidity, even under the most cruel suf- 
ferings : you have seen this abundantly proved. 

I am tempted to retort the Rector's argument 
upon himself. It is a fact that Julian says 
nothing of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 
Certainly, I may as justly say to him, this lover 
of derision would not have denied himself the 
gratification of turning that into ridicule, if the 
Christians in his time had believed in it. What 
reply would the bachelor of divinity make ? 
That no doubt he had amused himself in so 
doing at the expense of the credulous Christians, 
in one or other of the two books, which have 
never come down to us. Let him not then take 
it amiss, that I give him a similar answer on the 
Eucharist. When I hear Mr. Faber so loudly 
extol the pretended silence of Julian ; when I 
hear him conclude his redoubtable argument in 
these words, page 121 — " I may be mistaken in 
44 estimating the strength of this argument ; but 
44 it strikes upon my own apprehension, as being 
44 perfectly irresistible " I must say that one 

thing only astonishes me ; the assurance to 

u 



290 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

which he abandons himself in terminating* his 
episode. I am of opinion that it will give you 

little confidence in Mr. Faber's judgment. 

XXI. I believe I have now sufficiently replied to 
the quotations on the Eucharist, scattered up 
and down in the Difficulties of Romanism. Mr. 
Faber might have encreased the list, by con- 
sulting the Perpetuite de la Foi* I contented 
myself with referring to that work in my Dis- 
cussion Amicale : and indeed to what purpose 
should I have accumulated them ? And what 
will it avail Mr. Faber to make a lengthened 
display of them ? They are taken from writings 
made for the public, or discourses preached 
before the uninitiated, to whom the Fathers 
addressed themselves more frequently than to 
the faithful alone. Thus the obligation of con- 
cealing the mysteries was more frequent than 
that of manifesting them. Candour and good 
faith therefore would direct us to put aside those 
texts, which present intentional obscurity. But 

* The celebrated work of the two ablest French contro- 
vertists; always excepting him, to whom none can be com- 
pared, the most brilliant genius that has appeared in the church, 

BOSSUET. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 291 

in place of these texts and incidental expressions, 
let one single catechesis be finally produced 
against us. Then the objection would have 
some weight. For every one knows and acknow- 
ledges that instructions must have been clear 
and explicit, which were made to the newly 
baptized, on the subject of the sacrament of the 
altar, which they were about to receive. There, 
and there only will at any time be found with- 
out obscurity and treated ex professo the true 
doctrine of the Fathers on the Eucharist. Let 
only one of these catecheses be produced, where 
the neophytes are instructed to see nothing in 
the offerings, after consecration, but mere signs, 
simple types and figures of Jesus Christ absent, 
as Mr. Faber affirms, without being able to give 
any proof of it ; # let such a document be pro- 

* After saying at page 129 that I copiously adduce passages 
on the change of the elements into the body and blood of 
Christ, the Rector reproachfully adds that I say nothing of 
those, " in which this change is declared to be purely mural, 
u in which the elements are pronounced to be mere symbols, 11 
though these passages "fully explain all passages of the former 
" description." My reply is simple enough. I have not 
indeed cited a single passage which declares, that there is 
nothing effected but a moral change, that the emblems are 
mere symbols or emblems : for in truth I know of no such 

u 2 



292 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

duced, and then we shall have really to solve a 
serious difficulty. But to go in search of the 
real sentiments and belief of the Fathers in dis- 
courses and writings where they could not dis- 
close them, where they themselves apprize us of 
their difficulty in expressing themselves, this 
I must denounce as a proceeding antilogical, 
unreasonable and absurd. That it should be 
pursued without reflection, and by mere routine, 
as your divines have formed a habit of doing 
since 1662, I can conceive : but that, after having 
been admonished by a series of convincing 
proofs, they should still obstinately pursue the 
same method, and point it out to others as the 
true one, is assuredly preferring error to truth, 
and being disposed to go wilfully astray, and 
draw others into their own aberrations. 

XXII. 1 beseech you, Sir, to consider seriously 
the method adopted by Mr. Faber, and the con- 
sequences resulting from it. To the instructions 
exposed with the greatest clearness in the cate- 
cheses on the real presence, change of substance 



passages, and the Rector knows none either. He produces 
none, and will never be able to bring forward any such 

passage. 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 293 

and adoration, what answer does he give ? The 
same as to our arguments from the discipline of 
the secret, and from the liturgies. He does not 
enter straight forward upon the discussion : he 
bewilders his reader, and leads him out of the 
way by irrelevant quotations ; he opposes his 
quotations to mine, and pretends that his own 
sufficiently explain those which 1 had previously 
cited against him.* Your dogmas, says he, 
could not have been either the object of the 
secret, or the doctrine of the liturgies and cate- 
cheses, if it be true that they were unknown to 
the primitive Church. And it is precisely from 
the secret, the liturgies, and the catecheses, that 
irrefragable proofs crowd upon us, of the uni- 
versality and apostolicity of our dogmas. But 
he, being unable to refute, and unwilling to 
admit them, turns away his eyes, goes out of the 
straight path, and imagines that he shall destroy 
them, or at least counterpoise them, by shewing 
what we do not dispute, that the Fathers in 
several places have designated the offerings even 
alter consecration by the words, bread, wine, 

* Passages of this latter description, .... fully explain all 
passages of the former description, &c. p. 130. 



294 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART ii. 



sign, sacrament, type, emblem, figure and me- 
morial ; that they have spoken of them as 
spiritual aliments, and beverage, and mentioned 
manducation with faith and by faith. These 
expressions prove nothing against our belief, 
since we often use them ourselves.* They were 
the more familiar to the Fathers of the Church, 
as, without injury to their faith, they happily 
promoted their views, by designating the mys- 

* We say, the sacrament of the Eucharist ; we say the 
type, the sign, but understood the visible sign of the invisible 
body : in the canon of the mass, and even after the consecration, 
we say : pattern sanctum vita? oeternw et calicem salutis perpetuus : 
before receiving the precious blood, the priest says : calicem 
salutaris accipiam ; we sing pant's angelkus fit panis hominum ; 
datpanis ccelicus fguris terminum : we oppose to the idea of the 
Caphamaites a spiritual manducation. 

It is done with us by faith ; with you, not at all. For what 
great act of faith must be made, I pray you, to remember Jesus 
Christ at the sight of bread and wine placed on the communion 
table in memory of his death ? Much the same as we make to 
remind us of the Blessed Virgin, his mother, when we hear the 
Angelus bell ring. But we must have a lively and firm faith 
in the word of our Saviour, to believe him present under the 
outward species, notwithstanding all that is suggested by taste, 
colour, and smell. This is so true, that the Sacramentarians 
rejected our doctrine, because they could not bring themselves 
to make such an act of faith, and they oppose incessantly the 
authority of the senses, to our confidence in the word of Jesus 
Christ. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 295 

tery by its external appearance only. The 
uninitiated conceived no idea beyond ; while 
the faithful easily penetrated the veil, and from 
the sensible appearance, were led to the reality, 
which does not appear. 

For the rest, Sir, if you will be at the pains 
of examining, you will find that these expres- 
sions chiefly belong, as I must once more ob- 
serve, to those writings w hich the Fathers gave 
to the public, and the discourses which they 
pronounced before the uninitiated. In seeking 
the true sense of the catecheses in writings of 
this kind, Mr. Faber must suppose that the 
Fathers expressed themselves more openly on 
the Eucharist before the catechumens, Jews and 
Pagans, than before the newly-baptized at the 
moment of their first communion ! According 
to him then, the Church must have prescribed 
greater reserve before the latter, and kept her 
most intimate confidence for the former ! But 
she ordered precisely the contrary ; you have 
seen it already demonstrated. It is therefore 
evidently false reasoning to wish with the 
Reverend Bachelor to interpret the doctrine 
which w as of necessity to be exposed as clearly 



296 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt II. 

as possible to the neophytes, by that which was 
as necessarily to be concealed before unbelievers ; 
to explain what must have been manifest, by 
w hat must have been intentionally hidden ; 
that is, what is clear, by what is obscure — light, 
by shade. This is a first consequence of the 
method which I oppose. 

XXII I. In the second place, admit for one 
moment the principles and argumentation of 
Mr. Faber, and you will be forced to conclude 
that the primitive Church never knew any uni- 
formity in her doctrine ; that she at this day 
presents nothing but a discordant scene of 
opposite and contradictory opinions, a succes- 
sion of bishops in intestine war about doctrines, 
teaching pro and contra, some the real presence 
and transubstantiation, others a figurative pre- 
sence, a real absence, a moral change, the bread 
and wine retaining their own substance with 
their sensible qualities, and only passing from 
ordinary use to a religious distinction. Among 
the latter you must enumerate, if you believe 
Mr. Faber, St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertul- 
lian, St. Cyprian, &c. while among the former 
we cannot but reckon St. Ignatius of Antioch, 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 297 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem, S. S. Ephrem, Ambrose, 
Zeno, Gaudentius of Brescia, &c. whose testi- 
monies we have seen, leaving not a shadow of 
doubt on the Catholic belief. This is a second 
consequence. 

XXIV. Thirdly, not only will the Fathers be 
found in contradiction with each other, but 
even contradictory to themselves. For example : 
according to Mr. Faber, page 68, there is nothing 
physical in the change of the bread and wine 
spoken of by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, (Catech. 
Myst. 4) every thing there is moral ; and con- 
sequently it proves neither the real presence of 
Jesus Christ in the sacrament, nor a change of 
substance. But St. Cyril, who apparently knew 
what he was saying, explains himself in these 
words in the same catechetical instruction : 
" Believe that what appears to you bread, is not 
" bread, but the body of Christ, although the 
" taste judges it to be bread ; and that the wine 
" which you see, and which has the taste of wine, 
" is not wine, but the blood of Christ. " Accord- 
ing to Mr. Faber, St. Chrysostom acknowledges 
no more than a moral change in the Eucharist, 
because he calls it spiritual food, which after all 



298 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX Ut 

is quite a Catholic expression ; but besides that 
in the same homily on the treason of Judas, and 
in a hundred other places, several of which I 
have already quoted, he clearly establishes our 
doctrines, it will suffice to inform you in this 
place that he is considered among the learned 
as having been raised up by the Almighty to 
exalt and extol in the Church the grandeur and 
sanctity of the Holy Eucharist. None ever dis- 
coursed upon it with so much pomp and elo- 
quence as this great patriarch. If we are to 
believe Mr. Faber, St. Augustin teaches simply 
a moral change in the Eucharist, when he de- 
clares that the words of Jesus Christ to his dis- 
ciples are to be understood spiritually. But if 
we must attach the sense of Mr. Faber to this 
expression, St. Augustin contradicts what he 
had just established a little earlier in the very 
same discourse. For he had j ust been proving 
that we not only may adore Jesus Christ, when 
we receive him in the Eucharist, but even that 
we should sin if we did not there adore him. 
Here then we should have the real presence 
demonstrated by the adoration, and rejected a 
few lines farther on by the assertion of a simple 



chap. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



299 



moral change ! The same reasoning must be 
applied to Theodoret. Indeed it is impossible 
for the Fathers to escape the charge of self-con- 
tradiction, if you adopt the method of Mr. 
Faber. On the contrary, that which we have 
deduced from the secret, the liturgies and the 
catecheses save them from all contradiction with 
each other and with themselves. They uni- 
formly express themselves as they ought ; 
openly, when they could ; obscurely, when they 
found it necessary ; clearly, before the faithful, 
dogmatically explicit before the newly-bap- 
tized ; but reservedly and in hidden terms 
before the unbelievers. The error of Mr. Faber 
and all the sacramentarians, is in looking for 
the doctrine of the Fathers where it was neces- 
sarily involved in obscure terms ; instead of 
seeking it where it ought indispensably to have 
been explicit.* 

* The Rev. Bachelor, at page 135, makes me say that on 
the one hand, the Fathers communicated to the mystoe the 
grand secret of transubstantiation, while on the other, they 
declared to the uninitiated that the elements of bread and wine 
were only types, or figures, or representations of the body and 
blood of Christ. 44 By this contrivance," he adds, 44 and at no 
44 greater expense than that of a direct falsehood, every thing 
44 continued as it ought to be." Now here is a twofold and 



300 ANSWER TO THE [part ti. 

XXV. Fourthly, it is highly important to 
observe, that Mr. Faber's method would convict 
the Fathers of farther and still more fatal con- 
tradiction. Opposed to each other, and at 
variance with themselves in their instructions, 
they would have been still more so in their con- 
duct ; their teaching would have condemned 
their practice, and the doctrine which they 
taught in the pulpit, must have destroyed that 
which they professed at the altar. Those apos- 
tolic men, those pious and learned bishops cele- 
brated the divine mysteries as often as circum- 
stances permitted, at the head of their flocks. 
There united in profound recollection, pastors 
and people humbled before the majesty of God, 
addressed to heaven prayers animated with the 
fire of charity. There when profound silence 
announced the approach of the holy sacrifice, 
the celebrant offered to heaven those sublime 
prayers, in which he invoked the descent of 

gross falsehood. It exists in the word only^ which he palms 
upon us, but which never came from the mouths of the Fathers, 
nor from mine, when speaking of the sacrifice of the new law. 
Take away this ora/y, as truth, honour and good faith demand, 
and then are we all absolved — the Fathers and myself, from 
falsehood, and Mr, Faber from imposition. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 301 

the Holy Ghost upon the offerings, that he 
would come to change and transform by his 
omnipotence the bread and wine into the body 
and blood of Jesus Christ. There before com- 
munion, each one made aloud a fervent profes- 
sion of faith in the presence of our Saviour by 
the change of substance. There in fine, ad- 
vancing in turns towards the holy table, bowing- 
down in silent adoration, they received with 
love and trembling the body of our divine 
Saviour veiled beneath the species. These things, 
Sir, you have seen in the ancient liturgies of all 
the Christian churches. The Rev. Bachelor 
must have read them. Finding it impossible to 
answer them, he has turned away from them in 
sorrow. I do not blame him for his silence, for 
neither he, nor any one else will ever obscure 
the unalterable splendour of the liturgies. What 
I blame in him, is his not having the candour 
and courage to acknowledge it and surrender 
himself to it ; 1 blame him for having persisted 
in his method, for continuing to suppose the 
Fathers of the primitive Church contradictory to 
themselves in instruction and practice ; dis- 
closing the mystery without disguise to the 



30'2 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

uninitiated, and concealing it from the neo- 
phytes ; teaching the nations that in the new 
law as in the old, the bread and w ine are only 
signs and figures of Jesus Christ absent, and at 
the same time inviting the faithful by their ex- 
ample to adore Jesus Christ as present under 
those signs, emblems and figures. I accuse him 
in fine, of supposing the Fathers to have been 
alternately Sacramentarians in theory, and Ca- 
tholics in the sacred functions of the priesthood ; 
advocates of a moral change in their w ritings 
and sermons, after having shewn themselves at 
the altar intimately persuaded of a change of 
substance ; declaiming out of doors against the 
idolatry of paganism, and in their secret assem- 
blies erecting a new system of idolatry for the 
faithful, and obliging them by their own exam- 
ple to prostitute their vows and adoration to 
mere material substances. 

XXVI. I figure to myself that numerous and 
venerable train of pontiffs and doctors, the wit- 
nesses of the apostolical doctrines, and our true 
masters in faith — I imagine those holy and illus- 
trious personages, shaking off the dust of the 
tomb, returned to life, placing themselves 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 303 

between us and the Sacrament arians, and ad- 
dressing all those who share the profession and 
theology of Mr. Faber in the following words : — 
" You w ho seem to attach such value andautho- 
" rity to the uniform traditions, which we be- 
" queathed to you ; and who only need, as you 
44 say, to know them, to induce you to adopt 
" them ; how came you to misunderstand those 
" which we faithfully transmitted from the apos- 
44 ties to our various Churches, concerning the 
" most august of all the sacraments ? How came 
" you not to understand what we so often ex- 
" pressed in our writings, and what we shall now 
44 briefly repeat to you ? We admonished you 
44 that 44 the sublimity of the Eucharist so far sur- 
44 passed the limits of the human understanding, 
44 that it would have been folly in us to believe 
44 it, if it had not come to us from the very 
44 mouth of our divine Founder. He has said, 
44 my flesh is meat indeed, my blood is drink 
• 4 indeed. He leaves no room to doubt of the 
44 reality of his flesh and blood. Is not that the 
44 pure truth ? Let those only account it false, 
44 who deny Jesus Christ to be true God."* 
* St. Hilary ) book 8, on the Trinity. 



304 ANSWER TO THE [part it. 

XXVII. 44 In vain do you seek to persuade us 
" that you would not be staggered by mysteries, 
" but would admit the real presence and transub- 
" stantiatiou, if it were proved to you that we 
" had ourselves admitted them. You have abun- 
" dant proofs that we did so ; therefore you 
" deceive yourselves. The truth is, that your 
" reason seeks to sound and penetrate every 
" thing ; and because it cannot fathom the mys- 
44 tery, it imagines a certain moral change, and 
" certain empty signs to evade our testimo- 
" nies, and strive to reconcile faith with your 
" senses," 

44 What do y ou attempt, O daring mortals ! 
" Is it not an excess of folly and temerity in you 
" who are but a little dust kneaded together, to 
" presume to sound this abyss ? Partake of the 
" immaculate body and blood of the Lord, with 
44 a most full faith."* "Why do you attempt 
" to fathom what is unfathomable ? W hy do 
" you seek to comprehend things incomprehen- 
" sible ; and to penetrate what is impenetrable ? 
44 Let us believe God in all things, and not con- 
44 tradict him, although what he tells us should 
* St. Ephrem, Against Curiosity in fathoming Myst. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 305 

44 appear to us contrary to our thoughts, and to 
" our sight. Since it is his word which says to 
" us : this is my body, let us be convinced of 
" it, let us believe it, and behold it with the eyes 
" of faith/'* " I ask no reason of Jesus Christ 
" .... Therefore let no one talk to me of argu- 
" ment, when I am required to have faith : let 
44 reasoning be silent in the schools. Place your 
44 hand upon your mouth ; it is not lawful to 
44 dive into mysteries." j" 44 The mere animal 
44 and indocile mind, when any thing is beyond 
44 its reach, rejects it as an extravagant notion, 
44 because it surpasses its capacity. Its ignorant 
44 temerity leads it to extreme pride .... The 
44 Jews ought to have received the words of our 
44 Saviour without hesitation, as they had often 
44 admired his divine virtue, and invincible 
44 power upon earth .... And yet behold 
44 them coming forth against God with that 
44 senseless how: — How can this man give us his 
" flesh to eat P As if they were not sensible how 
44 blasphemous was such a manner of speaking, 
44 since in God resides the power of doing all 

* St. Chrysostom, Horn. 23, on St. John. 
+ St. Ambrose, on Abraham. 

X 



30G ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" without difficulty .... If thou persistest, O 
" Jew, in advancing this how — I will ask thee, in 
" my turn, how the rod of Moses was changed 
" into a serpent P How were the waters changed 
" into blood ? It behoves thee then much more 
" to believe in Christ and give credit to his words 
" . . . . As for you, when you receive the divine 
" mysteries, have faith free from all curiosity. — 
" This is what is required ; and not to oppose 
" any how to the words which are there said."* 
Candidly, gentlemen, do you find this doctrine 
at all in unison with your own ? Do men 
express themselves in this way, when they behold 
nothing in the Eucharist but your inanimate 
signs, your lifeless figures? Does this vehemence 
of language suit your moral change ; or this 
elevation of sentiments, your pitiful transition 
from a domestic use of the bread to a religions 
use ? Would ideas so gross and material as these 
have inspired what you have just heard, and 
what yet remains to be presented to your atten- 
tive consideration ? 

XXVII. « A man may well be carried in the 

* St. Cyril of Alexandria, B. 4 on St. John. 



CHVlMV.j DIFFICULTIES OF IMMANISM. 307 

" hands of another, but no one, in his own 
" hands ; we cannot therefore understand these 
" words literally of David ; (he was carried in 
" his hands)* but we see how that may be 
" understood of Jesus Christ to the very letter. 

For when, committing to us his body he said: 
" this is my body, Christ was held in his own 
" hands. He bore that body in his hands." 
" Jesus Christ drank himself of his chalice, lest 
" his apostles, hearing him say these things, 
" should say to themselves : what then ? Do we 
" drink blood, and eat flesh ? and should be 
" troubled. For when he spoke of these myste- 
" ries, many were scandalized. In order there- 
" fore that they might not then be troubled, he 
" himself gives them first the example, thus 
" inviting them to partake without trouble of 
" the mysteries : therefore it was that he drank 
t; of his own blood. Do not deceive your- 
selves, gentlemen ; these ideas and comments are 
evidently incompatible with your systems of a 
figurative presence, and a moral change. 

* St. Augustine on the title of Ps. 33, according to the Sep- 
tuagint. 

+ St. ChrysosL Horn. 71. 

x 2 



308 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

XXVIII. One single word ought to have 

sufficed to convince you that the real presence 

of the body and blood was always the object of 

our belief. This word cannot have escaped your 

notice ; so often is it repeated in our writings ; 

it is this, once again : " adore and communi- 

" cate."* "After having communicated of the 

44 body of Jesus Christ, approach to the chalice of 

" his blood, not extending your hands, but bow- 

" ing down in the attitude of homage and 

" adoration, saying, Amen.-\ Mary adored Jesus 

" Christ, the apostles also adored hm, and the 

" angels even adore him, according as it is writ- 

" ten ; let all the angels of God adore him. But 

" they not only adore his divinity, but also his 

" foot-stool, because it is holy. If the heretics 

" deny that the mysteries of his incarnation are 
" to be adored .... they may read in the scrip- 

44 ture that the apostles also adored him, when 

44 he was risen with a body clothed in glory. For 

44 we ought not to consider this foot-stool of his 

44 according to the common use of men. More- 

44 over we ought not to adore any but God 

* St. Chrys. Horn. 71. 

f St. Cyril, Horn. 4, Mystag. 



CHAP. IV] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 309 

" Therefore we must examine more particularly 
" what this foot-stool is, which is beneath the 
" feet of the Lord. For we read elsewhere : 
" the heaven is my throne, and the earth my foot- 
" stool. But we must not adore the earth, be- 
" cause it is but a creatnre. Let us take notice 
" however if the earth which the prophet would 
" have us adore, be not that earth with which the 
" Lord Jesus was clothed in his incarnation. — 
" We must say therefore that the footstool is the 
" earth ; and by this earth, is to be understood 
" the very Jiesh of Jesus Christ, which we still 
" adore in our holy mysteries* and which the 
" apostles adored in his person/' 

The adoration spoken of here, and in several 
other texts, and which we render to him in his 
sacrament, cannot be reduced to a mere profes- 
sion of honour, or a simple feeling of respect. 
You have just seen that it was precisely the same 
which he had received from Mary, and the wise- 
men in the manger, from the apostles before and 
after his resurrection, from the angels at his 
birth, and at his baptism, the same spoken of by 



* St. Ambrose, B. 3, of the II. Ghost. 



310 ANbWElt TO THE [part II. 

St. Paul, when he tells us that before him every 
knee should bow, in heaven, on earth, and under 
the earth ; that adoration in fine which is due to 
God alone. It was therefore the worship due by 
all men to the supreme majesty of their Creator, 
the worship of iatria. 

XXIX. But, gentlemen, you who speak in 
admiration of the primitive Church, and boast 
of having revived the beauty and purity of her 
doctrine, you have basely rejected the adoration 
which she held due to Jesus Christ in the Eu- 
charist. You attempt to justify yourselves 
before the people, and in your own eyes, by 
bringing together those passages of our writ ings, 
where we designate the offerings by the names 
of signs, types, emblems, representations, figures, 
and memorials. But in the first place, you 
ought to know that these expressions do not 
exclude the invisible presence of the body of our 
Saviour : you find our successors in the minis- 
try, and in doctrine, making use of the same 
before your eyes : we ourselves also occasionally 
used them before the faithful, to shew them the 
agreement of both testaments, the connexion 
between the old and new laws, the figure and 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 311 

the reality, the promise and its accomplishment. 
We expressed ourselves thus ; " The sacrifice 
" offered by our Lord to his Father is the same 
44 as that which Melchisedech had offered in the 
" figures of bread and wine. Jesus Christ ren- 
44 dered present the truth of his body and of his 
" blood."* " After the manducation of the ty- 
44 pical passover, Jesus Christ proceeded to the 
44 true sacrament of the true passover ; and as 
Melchisedech had offered in the figure of bread 
44 and wine, Jesus Christ rendered present the 
44 truth of his body and of his blood." f There 
44 is no less difference between the loaves of pro- 
44 position and the body of Jesus Christ, than 
44 between the shadow and the body, the image 
44 and the truth, the figures of things to come, 
44 and what was represented by those figures." J 
44 Every time that we approach to the body and 
44 blood of Jesus Christ, and receive him in our 
" hands, we believe that we become flesh of his 
44 flesh and bone of his bone, as it is written. — 
44 For Jesus Christ did not give to this body the 

* St. Cyprian, Ep. 53, to Cecilius. 
+ St. Jerom, Ep. to Iledilia. 
% Ibid, Ep. to Heliodorus. 



312 



ANSVVEIt TO THE 



[PART II. 



" name of figure or appearance, but he said : this 
" is truli/ my body, this is my blood."* The 
faithful who knew perfectly well that Jesus 
Christ came to fulfil the figures, as well as the 
prophecies of the old law, understood without 
difficulty the relation between the figure of his 
body, and the reality of his presence.*]- 

In fine we made frequent use of the words, 
signs, types, figures, &c. and with a very dif- 
ferent intention. You are not ignorant that we 
lived in the midst of Jews and Pagans ; that our 
divine Legislator had expressly forbidden us to 
disclose our mysteries to them. Place yourselves 
in our situation : what would you have done, if 
from the pulpit you had discovered, as was often 
our case, some of those profane persons in the 
assembly of the faithful ? Would you not then 
have made choice of the vague, ambiguous, and 
indefinite expressions which you often meet with 
in our discourses and homilies ? Would you 

* St. Maruthas, Bp. of Tagrit, Bibl. Orient. T. 1, p. 179. 

+ It was reserved for Mr. Faber and his masters since the 
year 1662, to imagine that ail the figures of the Old Testament 
had not been fulfilled in the New, and to inform us that bread 
was nothing more for Christians than for Jews ; still continuing 
the perpetual figure of the body of Jesus Christ. 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 313 

not have equally employed them in writings in- 
tended for public circulation ? And what would 
you say in these days to persons pretending to 
judge of your real sentiments, after the lapse of 
so many centuries, by passages which you found 
yourselves obliged to disguise ? This point we 
especially recommend to your notice ; and may 
you never forget it ! If our belief on the sacra- 
ment of the altar had been like yours, we should 
have had no motive to conceal it ; but on the 
contrary the most urgent reasons for its manifes- 
tation. 

XXX. Would you know in exact truth what 
we concealed with so much care, concerning the 
Eucharist ; what we did in the divine service ; 
and in what that service consisted ? You have 
only to open our liturgies, and you will see 
these things faithfully detailed. By our prac- 
tice you will become thoroughly acquainted 
with our belief. The connexion between both 
is so evident, that we were commanded to with- 
hold both alike from the knowledge of Jews, 
pagans, and catechumens ; but to shew them 
openly to the newly-baptized. We faithfully 
discharged this twofold obligation. We scru- 



314 ANSWER TO THE [part U. 

pulously excluded the uninitiated at the mo- 
ment when the sacrifice was about to commence ; 
and when we had to speak on the Eucharist in 
their presence, we confined ourselves to the ex- 
terior qualities of bread and wine. With the 
neophytes we went farther ; we proceeded from 
the appearance to the reality of the body which 
they were about to receive, and explained to 
them the order of the divine service, at which 
they were, for the first time, about to assist. 

Providence ordained that by exception from 
the general prohibition, some few of our cate- 
cheses should be committed to writing, and 
descend even to you. They suffice to give you 
a knowledge of all the rest ; for in every thing 
essential, they were alike in all the churches of 
Christendom : those which you have exhibit the 
universal doctrine of the first five centuries. 
During that long period of fervour, there was 
not a single Christian who heard from our 
mouths any other. We instructed our adults, 
as you instruct your children ; except that we 
developed our dogmas more fully, because their 
more enlarged understanding rendered them 
capable of receiving them so developed. Had 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 315 

you lived in our times, you would have received 
the lessons which we gave to them ; you would 
have had the same doctrine delivered to you ; 
and if it be true, as you constantly declare, that 
you are anxious to live and die in their com- 
munion, adopt, we entreat you, their faith and 
their works : believe and practice, on the most 
important subject of the Eucharist, what they 
believed and practised. 

XXXI. Alas ! why is it not possible for us to 
assure you, that you may safely persevere in the 
opinions which you have received from child- 
hood, and which you preach so zealously ! For 
we should be delighted to speak to you none 
but pleasant things ; God is our witness ! Yet 
at the hazard of displeasing you, we love rather 
to render you a solid service. We tell you there- 
fore plainly ; your belief is not that of the pri- 
mitive Church ; we never knew such a creed. 
Compare our catechisms with your own, on the 
subject of which we treat ; compare the expla- 
nations which you give of them, with those 
which you read in our catecheses. How remark- 
able is the difference ! Yet you must choose ; 
and to which will you give the preference ? 



316 ANSWER TO THE [part it; 

You cannot hesitate without contradicting jour- 
selves ; since, by your own acknowledgment, 
the first five centuries breathed the true, pure 
doctrine of the apostles. 

XXXII. Jesus Christ has said to us ; Amen, 
Amen, I say unto you : except you eat the flesh 
of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you 
shall not have life in you. And you gentlemen 
say ; eat the type of his flesh, and it is enough ; 
we promise you then life. The intention of 
Jesus Christ was to communicate himself to all 
his followers, and thus to procure for them a 
foretaste of heaven by a sacrament which no 
mortal could conceive, much less invent. And 
this heavenly and mysterious communication 
you reduce to the manducation of mere animal 
and sensible matter, and a remembrance which 
leaves the heart cold, and the soul empty, and 
without nourishment. Jesus Christ said ; this 
is my body ; no, you reply in equivalent terms, 
it is only the figure of your body ; the bread 
has only undergone a moral change ; and since 
its own substance is still there, yours is not 
there at all. Our Church taught by the apostles, 
invoked throughout the universe the descent of 



CHAP. IV.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 317 

the Holy Spirit, to change by his grace, to trans- 
form and transubstantiate the bread into the 
body of Jesus Christ : but if we are to listen to 
you, this change, transformation or transubstan- 
tiation is no better than a polluted source of 
idolatry and superstition. 

XXXIII. But O friends and separated bre- 
thren ! If you knew how afflicting to us is the 
boldness of your thoughts ; if you knew how 
much we lament the endless evils which it 
entails on yourselves and on your people; if 
you could conceive the resources, the consola- 
tions and delights, of which you deprive so 
many souls redeemed by the blood of Jesus 
Christ, and disposed to consecrate themselves to 
him and receive him with love, if they were 
otherwise instructed ! Forgive these admoni- 
tions, dictated solely by a regard for your in- 
terest, and drawn from us by alarm but too well 
founded for your security ; return to the creed 
of your forefathers, to that received by all the 
Christians of the first five centuries : believe 
henceforth with them, and according to our 
uniform teaching, " that after consecration, what 
" appears to your eyes bread, is not bread, 



318 ANSWER TO THE [part II. 

" though your taste judges it to be so ; but 
" that it is the body of our divine Redeemer." 

XXXIV. Unhappy is he, who having heard 
the truth, persists in rejecting it ! But more 
unhappy he, who after having discovered his 
errors, obstinately continues to impose them 
upon his people ! There are countries, as we 
see but too often, where it is deemed honourable 
to disfigure the truth, and to embellish error 
and falsehood ; where at the expense of so 
doing, men obtain applause and emolument. 
But to advance in life, and soon after to have 
to appear before the last awful tribunal, laden 
with this fatal applause, this perfidious emolu- 
ment ; — great God ! how can such a thought 
be endured, without trouble and terror ? 



DIFFICULTIES OF "ROMANISM. 



310 



PART THE THIRD. 



SUCCINCT REVIEW OF THE "DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM.' 



I. I enter with painful feelings upon this last 
and unpleasant portion of my defence. How 
sorrowful is the task which remains for me to 
fulfil ! Instead of the pleasure and consolation 
which I should have found in praising the accu- 
racy, uprightness, and candour of an antagonist, 
I find myself condemned to point out the faults 
with which his production swarms ; sometimes 
infidelity in quotations, or design in suppres- 
sions ; at other times falsehood in allegations : 
in this place, hostile disposition under the as- 
sumed tone of regard and politeness ; in that — 
treachery, speaking the language of simple in- 
genuousness ; and in a third, malevolence and 
ill-will, evaporating in calumniatory imputa- 
tions. I have already had occasiou to exhibit 
several reprehensible defects, and I have some- 
times chastised them with severity, because in a 



320 ANSWER TO THE [part lit. 

religious controversy I regard them as disgrace- 
ful prevarications. I shall now recommence a 
rapid review of the pretended Difficulties of 
Romanism, and shall more or less lightly visit 
upon what I find blameable. 

I have dwelt at length upon the questions 
which occupy my first and second parts ; be- 
cause they are of general interest to Protestants 
and Catholics, and are decisive against the Re- 
formation. As to those faults of the author, 
which I now proceed to notice, as they more 
personally concern him, I am aware that they 
may be but of feeble interest to the public. I 
should on this account have spared myself the 
unpleasant task of bringing them forward, had 
1 not feared the dangerous impression which 
they might have made on readers of moderate 
information. My natural inclination, in accord- 
ance with charity, would have led me to throw 
a veil over them : but the interests of truth, and 
zeal for the salvation of souls, impose on me the 
duty of producing them to the light. 

11. In the Preface, page x, line 17- — I read 
as follows : " To charge a Latin (he means a 
" Catholic) with what he holds not, and then 



NTRO. STAT.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 321 

" gravely to confute opinions which all the 
" while he strenuously disclaims, is alike unfair 
" and unprofitable." A maxim which is ad- 
mirable, because it is just. If it were honour- 
able to advance it, it was surely the contrary to 
forget it and contradict it, as Mr. Faber has 
done in his attacks on Satisfaction — Invocation 
of Saints, and Veneration of Images and Relics. 

Introductory Statement. 

III. At page 6 44 Of this work ( Discussion 
" Amicale ) the main object is evidently the pro- 
" selytism of the English laity." This reproach 
is for ever in the mouth of the author : it is re- 
peated " usque ad nauseam" from beginning to 
end of his work. My object is, as he would repre- 
sent it, to deceive the English laity and families 
travelling on the Continent, incapable from cir- 
cumstances of discovering the falsity of my 
assertions and proofs. But it happens that 
this work destined thus to effect conversions on 
the Continent was first printed in London, and 
in great measure sold in that capital. But what 
is most surprising is, that in the same page the 
author had just made this observation : " In an 

Y 



322 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

" epistle prefixed to it, this important work is 
" dedicated to the clergy of all the Protestant 
" communions." In fact, the epistle begins 
thus ; " Gentlemen, I cannot consent to give the 
" publicity demanded of me to a discussion 
" undertaken and conducted in the secrecy of 
" confidence, without wishing to address it 
" directly to you. It appears to me just that I 
" should present it in the first place to those of 
" the Reformed communions, who with more 
" interest to become acquainted with it, have 
" also more light to decide upon it. Let it go 
" forth then, and arrive where I desire ; let it 
" be examined by you, and receive from you 
" its first judgment." And in several places 
I refer my supposed correspondent to the 
doctors of his own church. Take as an in- 
stance, the following, at page 8, vol. 2d, " Your 
" divines, as well as ourselves, have the catecheses 
" at hand ; but I imagine, they have never ap- 
" peared very anxious to make you acquainted 
" with them. Ask them to communicate these 
" to you, and tell you what they think of 
" them. You will see that they will not comply 
"with your request with a very good grace : 



INTRO. STAT] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 323 

" and in truth,«£o speak to you sincerely, they 
" cannot do it." Or another : " For the rest, I 
" am far from wishing to take your religion by 
" surprise. If your doubts are not yet dissi- 
" pated — if there remains in your mind any 
" uncertainty as to the doctrine of the Fathers 
" concerning the Eucharist, you are at perfect 
" liberty to communicate this letter, as well as 
" those preceding, to such of your doctors as you 
" may please to consult." And at page 409, 
vol. 2, I address myself exclusively to the estab- 
lished Church throughout two whole pages ; so 
that my discussion begins and ends by exciting 
the attention and provoking the judgment of 
your doctors. 

This, I am of opinion, is a sufficient answer 
to the narrow-minded views, the miserable 
artifice which Mr. Faber would impute to me, 
when he supposes my object to have been to 
cast dust into the eyes of readers incapable of 
judging accurately. 1 could here adduce twenty 
persons among your countrymen, whom I have 
requested at various times to submit my work 
to the examination of your leading divines. I 

have always wished it, and I wish it still : and 

y 2 



324 ANSWER TO THE [ PA r T III. 

were I not fearful of acting imprudently, I 
could name in the church of England persons 
of extensive erudition, and possessing a zeal 
for reunion, alas ! too rarely met with, who have 
expressed a wish that my Discussion Amicale 
were dispersed all over England. For my own 
part, so far from fearing any thing from real 
intelligence, I have appealed to the enlightened, 
and now appeal to them again, provided they 
be accompanied with good faith. 

IV. At page 20, Mr. Faber introduces to us 
for the first time his favourite chimsera of a 
moral change of the Eucharistic bread, which 
returns a hundred times upon the stage, always 
with a bad grace, and ever exciting the pity of 
men of information. The learned Bachelor, 
delighted with his moral change in the Eucha- 
rist, undertakes to prove its apostolic origin 
from the united testimonies, as he says, of St. 
Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, 
St. Augustin, St. Athanasius, St. Gregory of 
Nyssa, Theodoret, Pope Gelasius, Facundus, and 
St. Ephrem: and thus he ranges them with 
some small deviation from chronological order ; 
but no matter. I have demonstrated precisely 



CELIB.VCY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 1 325 

the contrary assertion, as you know, by the 
authority of the very same Fathers, as I may 
here observe by the way ; for this is not what I 
wish to remark upon just at present. These 
same Fathers are clear, express, and conclusive, 
upon the invocation of saints : consequently on 
that question, I quote them with confidence. 
And what reply does Mr. Faber make to this at 
the bottom of p. 238 ? " The bishop cannot 
" produce a single authority, for the invocation 
" of the saints, however modified from the two 
" first centuries." This sentence stands trium- 
phantly in small capitals. I perfectly under- 
stand the tactics of the Rector : the Fathers of 
the third and fourth centuries are irrefragable 
witnesses, when he thinks them favourable to 
his opinions. But if they are opposed to him, 
they are no longer of any value — then he must 
have apostolic Fathers ! Behold the admirable 
equity and logic of this gentleman ! 

Celibacy. 

V. He has devoted pp. 25, 26, and 27, to the 
refutation of the prohibition for priests to 
marry. This time the Bachelor cannot keep 



326 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

his temper ; he is quite warm, and for three 
deadly pages in succession, he vents his fire and 
bile against the right reverend Fathers of the 
second council of Lateran. He attempts no less 
a task than tp prove them to be in opposition 
to St. Paul. I have already proved that they 
were not. But I will here go farther, and in 
one word exhibit the conformity between the 
strongest expressions of the council, and those 
of the sacred scripture. They are these : " in- 
" dignum est eos (sacerdotes) cubilibus et immun- 
ditiis deservire these are the words which 
provoked Mr. Faber so furiously against the 
Lateran Fathers. But let him cool a moment, 
if possible. I beseech him and his readers to 
cast their eyes upon the first four verses of the 
14th chapter of the Apocalypse. St. John, 
enraptured with the admirable harmony he has 
j ust heard, informs us that the celestial canticle 
was sung by 144,000 voices, and could be sung 
by no others. The Rector and many others 
with him, would have attempted it in vain. 
But from what mouths did these harmonious 
sounds proceed ? Of what kind was this class 
of privileged singers ? Observe well, Mr. Faber : 



TRADITION] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 327 

" These are they who were not defiled with 
" women : for they are virgins." Hi sunt qui 
cum mulieribus non sunt coinquinati : virgines 
enim sunt. Now cry out loudly against St. 
John. For you see that he has divided mankind 
into two classes, that of virgins, and that of 
persons defiled. You must take your choice : 
if you are no longer of the first, you must of 
necessity belong to the second. Well then, 
would it not have been better to have spared 
yourself a sally so virulent and scandalous ? 
Would it not have been wiser to have held your 
tongue and respectfully bowed your head be- 
fore your superiors of Lateran, who so far sur- 
passed you in knowledge ? 

Tradition. 

VI. In chapter third, on Tradition, page 46, 
the reproach is personally addressed to me. 
" No accurate investigator can read the bishop's 
ts remarks on these topics, without being struck 
" with the singular fallacies which pervade 
" them and he cites my fourth letter, wherein 
I establish the necessity of tradition by the 
doctrine of the primitive Church. Now what 



328 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX m 

course does the Bachelor take ? For the primi- 
tive and universal Church, of which I speak, he 
substitutes the Latin church, which is here out 
of the question. He sets out with this ingenious 
amendment to argue more at his ease against 
the reasoning which he imputes to me. Open 
my fourth letter, Sir, I entreat you : you will 
see that I draw my proofs from St Clement of 
Alexandria, St. Basil, and St. Chrysostom, as well 
as from Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Augustin, 
and St. Vincent of Lerins; and in the first 
rank from the 318 bishops of the first 
council of Nice in the affair of rebaptization, 
and the condemnation of Arius. Let me ask 
you, if the universal and primitive Church could 
be marked out more magnificently than by that 
grand ancient council, accepted at the time by 
all churches, and celebrated ever since by every 
age of Christianity. And yet Mr. Faber has 
the effrontery to insinuate that my proofs are 
confined to the Latin church ! And in his pre- 
tended answers, he sees nothing but the Latin 
church, which he ridicules with so much taste 
and good manners. Thus by fraudulently sub- 
stituting a word, he deceives his readers, and 



TRADITION.] DIFFICULTIES OF HOMANISM. 329 

sets himself to refute what I never said. I have 
seen you persuaded that Mr. Faber was a 
formidable theologian. Now judge of him by 
this single trait, and rest assured that he is not 
even an honest, fair-dealing man. This is not 
the language of politeness, I am truly grieved to 
own : but, if you can, pray tell me how to 
expose politely so disgraceful a manoeuvre. 

In the same place, No. 1, you read as follows : 
" The Latin church, as we all know, has handed 
" down to the present time various doctrines 
" and various practices. Some of these are 
" received by Protestants ; others of them are 
" rejected. Now this eclectric process is cen- 
" sured by the bishop ; and he requires us, as 
" we value the praise of consistency, either to 
" receive the whole mass or to reject the whole 
" mass." So the Bachelor makes me say : and it 
is always the Latin church, instead of the uni- 
versal Church. The following is what 1 really 
said, p. 196, vol. 1, referred to by him. " Many 
" already perceived (in the early controversies) 
" that in the violence of party spirit, things had 
" been carried too far. They began to com- 
" pound for the principle, being ready to admit 



330 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

" tradition on certain points, and yet rejecting 
" it on others, in honour of the reformation. 
" These first concessions led the way for others 
" more free and less circumscribed. Wise and 
" enlightened minds, considering calmly the 
" precepts of the apostle, the spirit of the primi- 
" tive Church, and the confidence which must be 
" yielded to the piety and fervour of the primi- 
a tive ages, to the deposition and testimonies of 
" all those holy bishops, and illustrious martyrs 
" of Jesus Christ, have felt the irresistible force 
" of the proofs, and have freely adopted the 
" ideas and language of antiquity on the sub- 
"ject of tradition." Now do I speak in this 
passage of the Latin church alone, as the Bache- 
lor would have his readers believe ? Do I not 
speak in express terms of the apostle, the primi- 
tive church, and the first ages ? And in express 
terms of all their holy bishops, and their illus- 
trious martyrs ? Do you see nothing in all this 
but the Latin church ? And could any one, 
without the most disgraceful falsity, pretend to 
see her only, who is neither named nor designated 
exclusively ? Was I not right in affirming that 
the authority of the primitive ages, as 1 described 



TRADITION] DIFf ICULTIES OF ROMANISM # 331 

them, ought to be admitted in every question ; 
and that it could not be lawful to reject it on 
some points of doctrine, when it was necessarily 
admitted on others ? 

VII. You shall now see another specimen of 
bad faith exhibited by the Rector at page 51 — 
" In the judgment of the bishop, tradition is of 
44 such vital importance, that the very canon of 
44 scripture depends upon it. By renouncing, 
" therefore, the tradition of the Latin church, 
" we effectively invalidate the authority of the 
" canon of scripture." But who has said a 
word to him about the tradition of the Latin 
church ? I have only spoken of universal and 
primitive tradition. My words are these, p. 
177, vol. 1 — " Most positively you are indebted 
44 to tradition for the scriptures, you have them 
44 from the hand of tradition, and without that, 
44 you would not know how to proceed to de- 
44 monstrate their authenticity : for it can only 
44 be proved that such a book is of such an 
44 apostle or evangelist, by its having been re- 
44 ceived and read as such in the churches.' 3 
This is a general expression, comprehending at 
once all the churches founded by the apostles 



332 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt hi. 

and their successors, those of the East, no less 
than those of the West, the churches in fact of 
all Christendom. It is clear that upon their 
testimony I build the authenticity of our scrip- 
tures, and not on the single authority of the See 
of Rome, as my truth-telling antagonist makes 
me do, " on the naked dogmatical authority of 
" the See of Rome." He knew full well that 
such was not my opinion, for my book was 
before his eyes ; but it suited his purpose to 
make those believe it who are unable to read 
my work. This is the third time in the same 
chapter that he deceives his readers by a most 
odious artifice. If I have not formed an erro- 
neous estimate of the English character, Mr. 
Faber will gain no credit among his country- 
men by methods so dishonourable, and pro- 
ceedings so far below a man of real rectitude. 

Real Presence. 

VIII. In his 4th chapter, p. 56, Mr. Faber 
teaches that the words, this is my body, may be 
understood in the sense of the Catholic Church, 
and in that of the Church of England ; in the 
literal sense on the principles of grammar, and 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



333 



in the figurative sense on the principles of 
rhetoric ; and thereupon he goes into confused 
attempts at explanation. But let us speak 
plainly on the subject. A body present only in 
figure, is absent in reality. But according to 
the sense of your Bachelor, the body of Jesus 
Christ is present in the Eucharist only in figure. 
Therefore according to him, it is absent in 
reality ; and he every where labours to prove it 
so. So far so good. But since he possesses so 
much penetration, as to perceive clearly in the 
words, this is my body, the real absence of that 
body, how could he begin his chapter by telling 
us that the two churches, ours and his own, both 
admit the doctrine of the real presence ? " The 
" disagreement between the Church of England 
" and the Church of Rome, in regard to the 
" doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, chiefly respects 
the supposed process denominated transub- 
" stantiation .... With respect to the doctrine 
" of the real presence, they both hold it." 
What ! one believes in the real presence of her 
Saviour, the other in his real absence, and yet 
both hold the same doctrine ! The Catholics 
reject the figure, to embrace the reality, the 



334 ANSWER TO THE [part ill. 

modern Anglicans have set aside the reality, to 
attach themselves to the figure ; and yet both 
are said to maintain the dogma of the real pre- 
sence, each party remaining on their own side ! 
What an extravagant assertion ! What surpass- 
ing absurdity ! Was ever any thing like it 
thought or said before ? Can a man be per- 
mitted thus to contradict himself, and trifle to 
this degree with his readers ? 

IX. At p. 66, it is curious to hear him again : 
" If, during the term of several centuries, we 
" shall find that the figurative interpretation was 
" the interpretation adopted by the early Catho- 
" lie church, we shall possess a moral certainty 
of its truth." You see plainly what Mr. Faber 
wishes to find in the primitive Church ; he is 
running after his figurative sense ; he would 
prove it morally certain. Then he did not speak 
truth, when he declared that he maintained like 
ourselves, the dogma of reality. Here he extends 
the primitive Church to a " term of several centu- 
" ries," and he is right in so doing. In other 
places he confines it to the second century, and 
there he is wrong. You see, Sir, we have only 
to confront him with himself, to exhibit endless 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 335 

contradiction between the opposite notions 
which he alternately adopts. 

X. In the note at p. 71, the passage of St, 
Gregory of Nyssa presents some examples of 
internal changes where none appears outw ardly : 
such as the stones of consecrated altars, which 
still preserve the same qualities apparent to the 
senses : such as the laic, who by consecration 
and unction of the holy oil is changed into a 
priest, without his ceasing to appear the same as 
he was externally : such is the Eucharist, in 
which the change of the bread is not pre- 
served outwardly. Under this relation, it 
is most justly classed with the other exam- 
ples; and yet, because differently from the 
other changes mentioned, that of the Eucha- 
ristic bread affects the substance, St. Gre- 
gory is careful to declare that expressly ; fearing 
no doubt, that some one seeing nothing more in 
that than in the other objects brought in compa- 
rison, might wrongly interpret his opinion. — 
And this is precisely what has happened to Mr. 
Faber, and he would have escaped it, if he had 
weighed attentively these words which he trans- 
cribed without understanding them ; "but, when 



336 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

" it has been consecrated in the holy mystery, it 
" becomes, and is called the body of Christ." Mr. 
Faber traced this sentence with his hand ; but 
his tongue would not pronounce it. If he con- 
sent to do so, God be praised ! I ask no more of 
him in this place. For the rest, I thank him for 
having furnished me with a proof, in the very 
passage which he deemed favorable to his own 
opinion. 

XI. I know not, dear Sir, if you will agree 
with me, but I am convinced that in the impor- 
tant concerns of salvation, it is highly criminal 
to present falsehood to one's readers, with the 
confidence with which an honourable man would 
present truth. Open Mr. Faber's work at p. 73 
and read at the top the following dogmatical 
sentence of two members ; " Whenever the fa- 
" thers descend to the strictness of explanatory 
" definition, they plainly tell us, again and 
"again, that the consecrated elements are only 
" the types, or figures, or symbols, allegorical 
44 images of the body and blood of Christ : (first 
" member of the sentence) and, not unfrequent- 
" ly, as if anxious to remove all possibility of mis- 
" apprehension, they assure us in express terms, 



real pres.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 337 

" that we do not eat the literal body, and that we 
" do not drink the literal blood of Christ, when 
" we participate of the blessed Eucharist." 
(Second member.) To eat the body and drink 
the blood in the literal sense, is to eat and drink 
according to the gross idea of the Capharnaites ; 
a carnal and barbarous manducation which all 
ages and all Christian people have held in 
horror ; and of which consequently there can be 
no question between us. But how can the Fathers 
be said to have taught that after consecration 
there is nothing but types and figures in the 
Holy Eucharist ; they who inform us that it was 
adored by all the faithful previous to their re- 
ceiving it ? They who have told us that not to 
adore it would be a sin ? They who adored it 
as often as they celebrated the liturgy at the 
head of the faithful ? You have seen, Sir, mul- 
tiplied and demonstrative proofs of the belief of 
the Fathers in the reality of the body and blood 
in the sacrament of the altar. The truth then is, 
than in their catecheses they taught it with as 
much energy and clearness as we could do, and 
that they spoke of it without disguise, when 

they could do so without betraying the secret. 

z 



338 ANSWER TO THE TART III. 

But it is falsehood to assert that, even when they 
concealed the mystery, they ever went so far as 
to say that there was nothing in the consecrated 
elements but types, or figures, or symbols of 
the body of Jesus Christ. Never, never did such 
expressions exclusively negative proceed from 
their lips ; never did their hands write them. 
But assuredly they would have written and 
spoken them a thousand times, had they corres- 
ponded with their belief. Then Mr. Faber 
might have victoriously brought forth the nu- 
merous passages. But neither he, nor any other 
has ever discovered them : they have not pro- 
duced, nor will they ever produce a single one. 
And yet this unfortunate man has dared to 
affirm to his countrymen and before God that 
the writings of the Fathers were full of passages 
of that description. How much do I feel for 
his readers ! For they naturally give credit to 
the minister who defends their creed, and pre- 
sents them, with the greatest assurance, asser- 
tions which they can neither suspect nor dis- 
cover to be false. O ! if I could make my 
voice heard over all England, I would say to its 
generous people : "Be you our judges ! Pro- 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 339 

44 nounce between cme doctrine which can only 
44 be attacked by continual outrages against 
44 truth, and another which can only be defended 
44 by such disgraceful artifices." 

XII. If Mr. Faber is so little scrupulous with 
the Holy Fathers, and takes the liberty of making 
them say what they never said nor thought, I 
need not be surprised to find him allowing him- 
self the liberty with me to suppress and change 
my words, and to put his own into my mouth. 
It is true that to give currency to this habitual 
species of impoliteness, he takes care to associate 
with it immediately some complimentary epi- 
thet : or else to add, as at page 100, that my 
argument appears to him managed 44 with no 
44 small dexterity while it appears to me, in 
his exposition of it, insupportably clumsy and 
ill-managed. I have frequently had occasion to 
notice parts of my book, which he has metamor- 
phosed in his own peculiar manner. It would 
be tedious to follow him in all his turns, and to 
expose all the artifices which he allows himself 
in this way ; it is a poor and pitiful resource for 
those who are determined at all hazards to de- 
fend a desperate cause, and who would have no 

z 2 



340 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

rational reply to make, were they not to begin 
by disfiguring the arguments which they under- 
take to refute. 

XIII. One of his artifices however richly de- 
serves to be exposed ; for I must own that the 
bold mendacity which distinguishes it would 
make it of itself suffice to establish its author's 
reputation. " The theory of the bishop," says 
he, p. 98, " as might be anticipated from the 
" purport of his work, is this. The secret dis- 
" pline of the primitive Church had for its sole 
" cause the doctrine of transubstantiation : for, 
" in the very nature of things, it could not possi- 
" bly have had any other cause than that which is 
" thus assigned to it. Hence it will follow, that 
" the grand and exclusive and special secret of 
" the Christian mysteries was the doctrine of 
" transubstantiation." Here are as many fal- 
sities almost as words. I speak of the real pre- 
sence ; Mr. Faber puts in place of that, transub- 
stantiation. I say that the secret discipline 
relative to the Eucharist had no other, and could 
have no other cause than that of the real pre- 
sence : he makes me say that the " secret disci- 
" pline of the primitive church had for its sole 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 34^ 

" cause the doctrine of transubstantiation." 
After advancing this in my name, he makes me 
conclude that " the grand , and exclusive, and 
" special secret of the Christian mysteries was 
" the doctrine of transubstantiation." This last 
word occurs twice in his two sentences, while it 
it is only found once in my whole chapter. I 
confine myself to the mystery of the Eucharist, 
and he represents me as taking in all the mys- 
teries of Christianity. 

Mr. Faber addressing himself particularly to 
those of his countrymen who are ignorant of 
French, affects great impartiality in quoting a 
passage of my book, which proves that I speak 
truth, and he falsehood. He adduces it as fol- 
lows in a note at p. 98 : " Or je me flatte a pre- 
" sent, Monsieur, que vous voyez clairement 
" que la discipline du secret sur l'Eucharistie a 
" eu effectivettient le dogme de la realite pour 
" cause, et n'a pu en avoir d'autre" I appeal 
to any one who knows French, whether this 
passage is susceptible of the sense given to it 
by Mr. Faber. Who could discover in it traii- 
substantiation ? I am only speaking of the 
real presence ; and who could find there the 



342 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

mysteries of Christianity ? I speak only of the 
real presence; I give that as the cause of the 
secret discipline on the subject of the Eucharist. 
For all that is exalted in this august sacrament 
arises from the reality of the presence. But 
whence did the Rev. Bachelor draw the con- 
clusion which he attributes to me, if not, like 
the rest, from the delirium of a capricious and 
over-heated imagination ? 

There only could he further have read that 
the real presence was the sole cause of the secret 
discipline. This assertion is not mine. I dis- 
tinctly wrote the contrary assertion, vol. 1, p. 
344, in these words : "I purpose to examine 
" thoroughly with you, the discipline regarding 
" the inviolable secrecy which all the faithful 
" observed on the sacraments, and especially on 
" the sacrament of the altar." I knew well at 
the same time that this secret discipline con- 
cealed from the pagans the mysteries of the 
Trinity and Incarnation. I might have said 
therefore, that it extended to both these mys- 
teries, as well as to all the sacraments. I did 
not say it, for the obvious reason that I was not 
writing the general history of the discipline in 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 343 

question. My sole object being to consider it 
exclusively in relation to the Eucharist, my 
duty was to confine myself to my subject ; and 
not to run out unseasonably into a diffuse di- 
gression on the several other subjects comprised 
under the law of secrecy. 

XIV. At page 100, the Bachelor returns to the 
charge that all my argument is built upon the 
ruinous foundation, that " the true doctrine of 
" the Eucharist was the exclusive secret of the 
" Christian mysteries." He supports the con- 
trary with perfect justice : but how does that 
affect me ? Whom is he combating ? I never 
advanced any such thing. He goes on further 
to maintain that " the true doctrine of the Eu- 
" charist was neither the exclusive secret of the 
" mysteries, nor yet even their principal secret." 
How again am I concerned in this ? Whom is 
he attacking now ? There is not a syllable of all 
this in any part of my book. It appears to 
have suited his purpose to impute to me the ex- 
pressions exclusive and principal secret : but 
once again, I disclaim them, they are not mine. 
They belong exclusively to the Difficulties of 
Romanism, not to the Discussion Amicale ; and 



344 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part Itl. 



for Heaven's sake, let each keep his own property 
where he finds it ! 

XV. Mr. Faber here enters upon the exposi- 
tion of the catecheses of St. Cyril ; of which the 
first eighteen are for the catechumens, the five 
last for the neophytes. The former often speak 
upon the Trinity, and present but one short 
though powerful allusion to the Eucharist,* 
which was developed at a later period to the 
newly-baptized in two of the five catecheses, 
which were intended for them. Every one 
knows that baptism is conferred in the name of 
the most Holy Trinity. This established, the 
observation of the Rector becomes absolutely 
silly. He is quite surprised that the doctrine of 
the Trinity should be so often discussed before 

* It is as follows : " If the Lord shall deem thee worthy, 
u thou shalt hereafter know, that the body of Christ, according 
c£ to the gospel, sustains the type of bread." Mr. Faber declares 
it difficult to say what these words can mean, unless "that the 
" bread is a type, or symbol, or figure, or representation of 
" Christ's body." But this is precisely reversing the declara- 
tion of St. Cyril. The sentence is quite clear to any one ini- 
tiated : the divine substance sustains the appearance of bread, 
its qualities, apparent to the senses, sustain the figure, or type, 
or representation of bread. In St. Cyril, it is the body of Jesus 
Christ which represents the image of bread : in Mr. Faber, it 
is the bread which represents the body of Jesus Christ. 



real PRES. J DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



345 



those who were to be baptized in the name of the 
Trinity ! And he appears to wonder that there 
should be but a single short hint of the Eucha- 
rist, before those from whom the law required it 
to be concealed till after their baptism ! But 
we have a new proof of his erudition in another 
way. The Bachelor remarks that in the last of 
the catecheses, mention is made of prayers for 
the dead, " which/' he most learnedly observes, 
" had then begun to be partially introduced, 
" which Cyril owns were objected to by many, 
" &c." He was not aware then that this prac- 
tice is in all the liturgies ; a certain proof of its 
apostolicity. As to the great oppositiou made 
to it in the fourth century, that is a pure fiction. 
For we cannot make any account of sucli men 
as Aerius and Vigilantius, who were condemned 
at the time by all the churches in the world. 

XVI. After a long digression on the doctrines 
of the Trinity, which is no way connected with 
my Discussion Amicale, Mr. Faber triumphantly 
concludes that the Eucharist was neither the 
exclusive nor the principal secret of the Chris- 
tians. I wish him joy of his discovery ; I am no 
way concerned with the ten deadly pages of this 



346 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

dissertation. But at page 115 he at length ar- 
rives at the point ; he announces his intention to 
prove that the real presence — transubstantiation 
according to him, for he always uses one word 
for the other — "was not taught at all in the 
" mysteries, even under the form of the very 
" smallest and least important secret." O ! now 
I feel interested. I trust you know by this time 
what to believe on this question : and I am con- 
vinced that the Bachelor will proceed more care- 
fully, if he returns to the subject. I give up my 
proofs to him, to the divines of his Church, to 
all those of the Protestant Communions who 
accord with him in opinion against the real pre- 
sence of our divine Saviour in his most holy 
sacrament of the altar. They will labour in vain 
to demolish them. 

Mr. Faber exhibits and admires with reason 
the secret discipline, as one of the most curious 
subjects of ecclesiastical antiquity. Yet he does 
not appear to have searched it deeply. Had he 
done so, it would have suggested to him very 
different reflections. I even suspect that before 
the appearance of the Discussion Amicale^ he 
was very little acquainted with that venerable 



real PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 347 

and ancient law of secresy, sealed by the blood of 
many martyrs ; which is a mine rich in proofs 
on the most important points called in question 
by the ignorant temerity of these later ages. I 
am far from having exhausted it : others will 
penetrate yet further into it. I applaud their 
success beforehand, happy in having pointed out 
the opening, and put them in the way. 

XVII. In my Discussion Amicale I seriously 
challenged all the Sacramentarians, and I now 
challenge them again, with Mr. Faber at their 
head, and with him all his brethren of the Church 
of England since the year 1662, to declare to us 
plainly why the primitive Church ordained an 
inviolable secrecy on the subject of the Eucha- 
rist. Let us allow them time to consider their 
answer well. They will take a long time I am 
afraid, before they produce one satisfactory. — 
Every one knows that the primitive Church had 
strictly enjoined to conceal from the infidels 
what was said and done in her assemblies, from 
which the profane were excluded. After the 
lapse of so many ages, how are we to discover 
what the faithful practised there among them- 
selves for so long a period, unknown to the 



348 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt hi. 

uninitiated ? When the Liturgies appeared in 
open day, they made it known to the whole 
world. They displayed to the eyes of all, the in- 
terior of these holy assemblies. They indicate 
even at this day the prayers, the acts of faith, 
hope, and charity, the thanksgivings which pre- 
ceded, accompanied, and followed the bloodless 
sacrifice of the new covenant. 1 have given 
abundant details of these things in my ninth 
letter, from p. 388 to p. 445 of my first volume. 
Mr. Faber makes mention of this letter, he must 
at least have gone through it, and yet, what does 
he say of it ? Nothing, Sir : he does not dare to 
look steadily upon the liturgies, their brilliancy 
dazzles his visionary organs, he turns aw ay from 
them, and runs for refuge to mere common-place 
observations. You have seen these refuted in 
the second part of the present work. 

XV111. 1 had remarked that the Fathers laid 
open the mystery clearly to the faithful, while 
they concealed it from the uninitiated. Mr. 
Faber, at p. 135, reproaches me with having 
attributed duplicity to the Holy Fathers, both 
in principle and practice : he accuses me of 
having represented them as guilty of direct 



REAL PRES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 34g 

falsehood. " To the mysta, they declare, with- 
" out reserve, the grand secret of transubstan- 
" tiation (he ought to have said, of the real 
presence ; he regularly uses the wrong word in 
this matter,) " to the pagans and catechumens, 
" they propound the symbolical or allegorical 
" nature of the consecrated elements ; assuring 
" them, that these elements are only types, or 
" figures, or representations of the body and 
" blood of Christ." This assertion is completely 
false ; the great falsehood lies in the word only 
inserted by Mr. Faber : 1 have shewn this re- 
peatedly. 1 will merely in this place justify the 
process of the Holy Fathers, and acquit them of 
falsehood with the support of a decision of St. 
Augustin, who was apparently quite as well 
versed in morality as the Rector of Long Newton. 
" He who seeks simplicity of heart, ought not 
" to consider himself culpable, if he conceal 
" something which the man from whom he 
u conceals it, could not understand. Nor is it 
" hence to be inferred that it is lawful to lie. 
" For it does not follow that we speak falsehood, 
" when we conceal the truth."* This is pre- 

* " Qui simplex cor habere appetit, non debet sibi reus 
" videri, si aliquid occultat quod ille, cui occultatur, capere non 



350 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

cisely the case with the ancient Fathers. They 
had no need of reserve or caution with regard 
to the faithful ; therefore they spoke the whole 
truth to them openly. But it was quite other- 
wise with respect to the uninitiated, to whom it 
was forbidden to reveal the mystery ; therefore 
before them they confined themselves to the 
exterior part of the Eucharist. They said then 
that it was the sign, the figure, the sacrament 
of the body of Jesus Christ : but they never 
said that it was only the figure of the body, as 
Mr. Faber loudly declares, and wishes to per- 
suade his readers. Thus did the Fathers fulfil 
all justice ; strong nourishment for grown up 
men ; milk for children and the infirm. What 
Mr. Faber calls " contrivance," " dexterity," 
" falsehood," was no more than prudence, cha- 
rity, and obedience to the divine and ecclesias- 
tical law. The Catholic finds every thing in- 
telligible, connected, and consistent in this 
method of the Holy Fathers ; but to the Sacra- 
mentarian all is confusion, embarrassment, and 



potest. Nec ex eo arbitrandum est licere mentiri. Non enim 
est consequens, ut cum verum occultatur, falsnm dicatur." — 5. 
August, contra Mendacium, Cap.x. 



CHARACTERS.] DIFFICULTIES OF* ROMANISM. 351 

contradiction : a proof that the belief of Cat holies 
is true, and that of the Sacramentarians false. 

Character of the First Reformers. 

XIX. Passing on to p. 150 I find another re- 
proach which Mr. Faber thinks proper to bring 
against me with his usual rectitude of mind. 
He accuses me of being "superfluously copious," 
because I exposed Luther, Zwinglius, and Cal- 
vin at open war with each other. But how 
could I pass over in silence the three champions 
of the reformation in a work on the Church of 
England in jjarticular, and the Reformation in 
general P I am perfectly aware that you do not 
recognize the spiritual supremacy of any one of 
these three : but if you acknowledge no one of 
them as a Father, all three must feel pride in 
claiming you as their children. And for this 
reason : you have borrowed from one and the 
other, and from their several contributions arose 
your body of doctrine, which you have worked 
up and established under the form which suited 
your convenience.* You are not, properly 

* I do not even except the episcopacy among you. The 
name is of little consequence ; the superintendants of Germany, 



352 ANSWER TO THE j^PAUT III. 

speaking, a Lutheran, nor a Zwinglian, nor a 
Calvinist in particular ; but in a general point 
of view, you are all three — Lutherans, Zwing- 
lians, and Calvinists. Not so ; exclaims Mr. 
Faber, " we are Catholics of the Anglican Church, 
" no less than the bishop of Aire (Strasbourg) is 
" a Catholic of the Gallican Church." This was 
very true before the fatal introduction of your 
King Henry to Ann Boleyn ; since that, your 
situation is altered. A man is no longer a Ca- 
tholic when he departs from unity. You say in 
the creed, " I believe in one .... Catholic 
" Church." Return then to this one Catholic 
Church, if you wish to be Catholics in England, 
as we are in France. 

XX. "Certainly," continues our author, "we 
" honour Luther and Calvin and Zwingle for 
" their works' sake" without feeling our- 

" selves pledged to act as umpires between these 

and the bishops of Sweden, Denmark, and England, are in 
reality on a similar footing. They labour under the same 
doubts as to the validity of their ordinations, the same certain 
nullity of their spiritual jurisdiction. For schism has abrogated 
that every where alike ; in the same manner as the revolt of every 
ambassador or minister puts an end to the power which he held 
from his sovereign. 



CHARACTERS] DIFFICULTIES OF IIOMANISM. 353 

44 three eminent foreigners." It becomes then 
incumbent on me to give the reader a just idea 
of these three heroes, on whom he respectfully 
bestows the title of eminent. This may lead me 
to some length, but it is necessary. Luther 
claims the first place ; " I burn," says he, " with 
" a thousand fires in a flesh untamed. I feel 
" excited towards women with a fury which 
" borders upon madness. I, who ought to be 
44 fervent in spirit, am only fervent in impu- 
44 rity."* ' fc Strong in my knowledge, I would 
44 not yield either to Emperor, King or Devil : 
" no, not even to the whole universe. "•)- His 
cherished disciple informs us that Luther knew 
his immorality so well, that he wished to be 
removed from the ministry of preaching.* 44 1 
44 tremble," wrote Melancthon, 44 when I think 
44 of the passions of Luther ; they do not yield in 
44 violence to the fury of Hercules. "§ 44 This 
44 man," says one of his contemporaries of the 
reformation, 44 is absolutely furious. He does 

* Luther s Table Talk. 

+ His Reply to the King of England, 

X Sleiden, book xi. an. 1520. 

§ Letter to Theodore. 

a a 



354 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

" not cease to combat the truth against all 
"justice, and even against the cry of his own 
" conscience/'* 44 He is inflated with pride and 
" arrogance, and seduced by Satan. "j* " Yes 
44 Satan has so made himself master of Luther, 
44 as to make us believe that he is determined to 
44 possess him entirely. "£ 44 He has written all 
44 his books by the impulse and under the dicta- 
44 tion of the Devil, with whom he had an inter- 
44 view, and who in the struggle appears to have 
" overthrown him with victorious arguments." § 
44 Truly," said Calvin, 44 Luther is very wicked. 
44 Would to God that he had taken care to put 
44 more restraint upon the intemperance which 
44 rages on all sides of him ! Would to God that 
44 he had thought more of gaining a true know- 
44 ledge of his vices." || O what an honourable 
and eminent personage ! 

XXI. Now let the second appear on the stage. 
Zwinglius speaks thus of himself : 44 1 cannot 
44 conceal the fire which burns me, and urges me 
44 to incontinency ; since it is true that its effects 



* Hospiniun. + QZcolampadius. X Zwinglius, 
§ The ch. of Zurich against the Confess, of Luther p. 61. 
|| Quoted in C. Schlussenberg. 



CHARACTERS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



355 



44 have brought upon me already but too many 
" disgraceful reproaches among the churches."* 
Luther declared openly that Zwinglius was the 
progeny of hell (what an origin for the honour- 
able and eminent personage of Mr. Faber !) an 
associate of Arius, a man not deserving to be 
prayed for by any oncf 44 Zwinglius" Luther 
wrote, " is dead and damned, wishing like a 
44 thief and a seditious man to force others by 
44 arms to follow his error. "J Brentius, whom 
Bp. Jewel called the grave and learned old man, 
declares that 44 the doctrines of Zwinglius are 
44 diabolical, full of impieties, depravity and 
44 calumnies ; that the error of Zwinglius on the 
44 Eucharist (that of a figurative presence, so 
44 dear to Mr. Faber), led to many others still 
44 more sacrilegious. "§ 44 Blessed is the man 
44 who hath not gone into the council of the 
44 Sacramentarians (the partisans of the tigura- 
44 tive sense, such as the modern Anglicans) 
44 blessed is the man who hath not stood in the 

* In Purenes. ad llelvet. fol. 44. 

t Tome 2, fol. 36, quoted in Florimond. 

t Ibid. 

§ Brentius in recog. Proph. et Apost. in fine. 



Aa 2 



356 ANSWER TO THE [part III 

" way of the Zwinglians, nor sat in the chair of 
" Zurich ! You understand what I mean."* 
Such in doctrine and deeds was that Zwinglius, 
in these days so honourable and eminent in the 
eyes of Mr. Faber ! 

XXII. Let us complete the sketch of this 
noble and pious triumvirate by a few traits of 
Calvin. " Do not scruple," he wrote to one of 
his powerful friends, " to rid the country of 
" those zealous fanatics, who .... would repre- 
" sent our belief as a reverie. Such monsters 
" ought to be smothered, as I did in the execu- 
u tion of the Spaniard, Michael Servetus. For 
" the future, 1 do not imagine that any one will 
" do such a thing." " Calvin, I know, is violent 
" and perverse ; so much the better. That is 
" the man we want to promote our cause."f 
" Calvin," said Bucer, " is a real mad dog. 
" That man is bad ; and judges of people, ac- 
" cording to his own love or hatred of them." 
In 1588 there appeared in London a writing 

* Luther. Ep. ad Jacob, presb. 

+ The German JVolmar, who while he gave him lessons 
at Bourges in Greek and Hebrew, had filled him with the new 
doctrines of Germany. 



CHARACTERS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



357 



approved by the Anglican bishops* against the 
Calvinist sect. Calvin and Beza are therein 
represented as proud, intolerant men, who, by 
open revolt against their lawful prince, had 
established their gospel, and assumed the go- 
vernment of the churches with a tyranny more 
odious than that, with which they so often re- 
proached the sovereign pontiffs. The English 
bishops protest before Almighty God that among 
all the texts of scripture cited by Calvin or his 
disciples in favour of the church of Geneva 
against the church of England, (which at that 
time believed in the real presence) there is not 
one which is not distorted to a sense unknown 
to the Church and the Fathers from the days of 
the apostles.-]* So that were they to return to 
life, .... they would be astonished that there 
should be found in the world a man of such 

* " A Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline^ by Bishop 
u Bancroft*'' At this period, the church of England professed 
the doctrine of the real presence, which she did not abandon 
till 74 years afterwards. 

+ It is remarkable that the Fathers quoted by Bishop 
Bancroft are precisely those whom Mr. Faber has been bold 
enough to adduce in favour of his moral change, his allegorical 
and purely figurative sense: they are S. S. Ambrose, Jerome, 
Augustin, Chrysostom, &c. 



358 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART III. 



extravagant audacity as to dare thus to abuse 
the word of God, himself, his readers, and the 
whole world. " Happy," exclaims Bishop Ban- 
croft, " a thousand times happy had it been for 
" our island, if no Englishman or Scotchman 
" had ever set his foot in Geneva, if he had 
" never known a single one of these Genevese 
doctors ! " Calvin declared that Luther had 
done nothing of any value .... that people 
were not to amuse themselves with following 
his footsteps, and being half-papists ; but that 
it was far better to build a new church alto- 
gether.* 

By this time, Sir, you will know what opinion 
to form of these famous triumvirs. They aimed 
at the same point, each in his own way : they 
understood each other thoroughly. It would 
therefore be the highest injustice to call in ques- 
tion the judgment they have passed upon each 
other and upon themselves. Our Rev. Bachelor 
particularly cannot but believe his honourable 
and eminent personages : he could not refuse 
them credit, without contradicting himself. Let 

* See the Appendix, p. 77, of my 1st vol. where will be 
found what the early reformers thought and wrote in all truth. 



characters.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 359 

him reconcile, as he thinks proper, his opinion 
of these gentlemen with the characters they have 
left us of themselves. As for you, Sir, I flatter 
myself that after acknowledging the justice 
which they have mutually rendered to each 
other, you will so far do them justice, as not 
to consider them worthy of credit on any other 
subject. 

XXIII. Thus when they tell you that Jesus 
Christ did not establish the apostles and their 
successors to preserve the faithful in the unity 
of his doctrine and of his Church ; that he did 
not promise to be with them and direct their 
teaching till the end of the world ; you will not 
believe them. When they tell you that the right 
of interpreting his Testament was left by Jesus 
Christ to the faithful individually, or even to 
some particular teachers, you will not believe 
them : and you will be the less disposed to give 
them credit, as you see in your own country at 
this day, Christianity torn in pieces and laid 
waste by a multitude of sects, all sprung out of 
this absurd presumption. 

If they shall tell you that in the most Holy 
Eucharist, there is no change of substance, or 



360 ANSWER TO. THE [part III. 

that our Saviour is not there really present, but 
that there is only a type, an emblem or figure 
of his body, you will not believe them. When 
they tell you that confession to a priest, though 
useful in some cases, is never necessary in any ; 
and that you can always obtain pardon of your 
sins, without recourse to the ministry of those, 
to whom alone Jesus Christ gave the power of 
remitting them, you will refuse to believe 
them. When they say that our divine Saviour's 
satisfaction exempts you from any personal 
satisfaction in this world, or the next, you will 
not believe them. When they shall tell you 
that at the moment of death, souls still defiled 
with those smaller stains which heaven cannot 
admit, will be at once cast into hell, you will 
refuse to believe them. When, in fine, they 
shall tell you that prayers for the dead, in use 
from the first beginning of Christianity, cannot 
afford them any comfort, you will not believe 
them. 

XXIV. " But," you will exclaim, " all these 
" points of doctrine are exactly our own : did 
" they really come to us from such depraved 
" men ?" If you consult Mr. Faber, he will tell 



characters.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM* 361 

you that however great a resemblance may be 
found between the Church of England doctrine, 
and that of the three reformers, the utmost that 
can be discovered is an imperfect family like- 
ness. For the established Church acknowledges 
none for its progenitors, and heads, but those 
sages, those venerable bishops, who in the con- 
vocation of 1562 modelled their doctrines upon 
the antiquity, the faith, and practice of the 
primitive Church. Certainly it is not well to 
deny our parentage. We may blush at what 
our fathers were, but we ought not to disown 
them. With history in our hands, let us compel 
Mr. Faber to carry up his pedigree a step higher, 
though it will not thereby be more ennobled. 
Ask him from what source Queen Elizabeth's 
bishops derived their reformed theology. The 
new doctrines had for more than forty years 
been accredited in Switzerland and Germany ; 
from those countries they had been introduced 
into France and Holland. In the time of Henry 
VIII. they had clandestinely found their way 
into England with the most Rev. Dr. Cranmer 
and his wife ; and under the youthful Edward 
they spread abroad their sweet odours more 



362 ANSWER TO THE [part in. 

freely. When Mary came to the throne, those 
ecclesiastics who were seduced or infected, sought 
asylums at Geneva, in Switzerland, and various 
states of Germany. Hence, after long draughts 
at the fountains of Luther, Zwinglius, & Calvin, 
they returned to their country, quite full of the 
new opinions, which they afterwards produced 
in the form of the 39 articles, and seasoned to 
the taste of the country in the holy and vener- 
able convocation of 1562. Such is the historical 
fact : such is the cause of that filial resemblance, 
which you judiciously observed between the 
Fathers of the famous convocation and the im- 
mortal triumvirate of the Continent. I am sen- 
sible how humiliating is such a descent to the 
church of England : but there is still a way of 
escaping ; it is to destroy it, and retreat from 
it with all expedition. 

XXV. At the end of the same note, Mr. Faber 
appears to find fault with my having adduced, 
p. 333. vol. 1 — Forbes, Montague, Thorndyke, 
and Parker, as favourable to transubstantiation. 
He alleges that they only maintain what the 
Church of England has ever maintained, and 
what he himself has said. It is true that Mr. 



CHARACTERS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



363 



Faber has expressed the sentiment which I 
quoted from Forbes, and that I signified my 
satisfaction thereupon. But would he also con- 
sent to say with the celebrated Thorndyke, that 
" the elements are really changed from ordinary 
" bread and wine, into the body and blood of 
" Christ, mystically present, as in a sacrament ; 
" and that in virtue of the consecration, not by 
" the faith of him that receives ?"* Would he 
declare with Bp. Montague, after S. S. Cyprian, 
Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil and Ambrose, that the 
change caused by the consecration of the ele- 
ments is called a transmutation and transele- 
mentation ?f Would he acknowledge with Bp. 
Parker, that " the ancient Fathers, from age to 
" age, asserted the real and substantial presence, 
" in very high and expressive terms. The Greeks 
" and Latins styled it, conversion — transmutation 
" — transformation — transfiguration — transele- 
" mentation, and, at length, transubstantiation. 
" By all which they expressed nothing more or 
" less than the real and substantial presence in 
" the Eucharist." % Let Mr. Faber honestly 

* Epilogue, b. 3, ch. 5. f Appeal, ch. 1. 

X Reasons for abrogating the Test, p. 13. 



364 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

adopt the doctrine and language of these learned 
divines ; and I shall then quote him at the end 
of them, with much more joy than I felt pain in 
refuting his pitiful invention of a moral change, 
and the opinion of a figurative presence which 
he affects to discover in antiquity, with the 
moderns of the Church of England, since the 
year 1662. They borrowed it genuine from the 
schools of Zwinglius and Calvin. 

Mr. Faber concludes his long note by shewing 
great indignation at a liberty, which every con- 
trovertistof good sense would have taken equally 
with myself — that of producing against him his 
own divines, Montague, Thorndyke, and Parker, 
who were so favourable to transubstantiation. 
So natural and just a proceeding he denounces 
as " a stratagem unworthy of the Bishop of 
" Aire," (Strasbourg) : and particularly as he 
observes " in a work professedly addressed to 
" the English laity " The Rector must have a 
very short memory : he continually forgets that 
he himself represented my Discussion Amicale 
as not addressed to the laity, but to the clergy 
of all the Protestant communions, in a dedicatory 
epistle at the head of the work * 

* See Difficulties of Romanism, page 6. 



CONFESSION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



365 



Confession. 

XXVI. In his 9th chapter, on Confession, Mr. 
Faber scarcely touches the proofs developed 
by me in sixty-six consecutive pages. Since he 
has found it convenient to leave my arguments 
and authorities unrefuted, I shall content myself 
with entreating his readers to compare my 11th 
letter with his 9th chapter. I shewed by reason- 
ing suggested to me by texts from the New Tes- 
tament, and by testimonies furnished by the 
Fathers of antiquity, that auricular confession 
is of divine institution ; that it is indispensably 
necessary, in act or desire, to obtain pardon for 
our faults, and that it requires the enumeration 
of all grievous sins of which we feel ourselves 
guilty. Mr. Faber has read these arguments 
and testimonies : and yet it seems that he wishes 
to ask me of what kind of auricular confession I 
would be understood to speak ? Whether of that 
obliging to a special enumeration of sins, or that 
which requires no more than a general acknow- 
ledgment of our having sinned? Surely he 
might have spared himself such a question, 
superfluous to say the least, after my discus- 
sion of this important matter. 



366 ANSWER TO THE [part Hi. 

He comes next to compare our confession 
made in detail, with that of his own church made 
only in general terms : and as would be readily 
presumed, gives the preference to the latter. It 
is curious to see the reason on which he builds 
his preference. He has discovered with singular 
penetration, and rare sagacity, that with the 
most exact detail, a hypocrite may deceive his 
confessor as to the actual dispositions of his 
mind. Assuredly, his supposition will not be 
disputed ; for no man can clearly read the heart 
of another : but have I not the same right to 
suppose that the sinner whom Mr. Faber repre- 
sents " without a single specification in detail/' 
may be equally a hypocrite when he chooses to 
conceal his actual dispositions ? He will even 
find it the more easy to succeed in his deception, 
as he will have no probation to undergo, fewer 
facts to declare, and fewer words to speak. But 
what avail these poor attempts, and what can 
be inferred from these imaginary suppositions, 
against the habitual and voluntary course of the 
tribunal of penance ? 

XXVII. Mr. Faber makes small account of 
entire confessions. It is enough for him if the 



CONFFSMON] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. S67 

sinner acknowledges in general terms that he 
has deeply sinned against God, and declare 
himself repentant from the bottom of his soul. 
He seems to have no true idea of the ministry of 
a confessor. This does not solely consist in 
granting or refusing absolution, but in deciding 
upon it j udiciously from an accurate knowledge 
of the case. This, you will at once conceive, 
obliges the priest to study the actual disposition 
of his penitent, to feel assured, before he ab- 
solves him, that his repentance is true, and not 
merely the effect of some transitory emotion : 
therefore he will have recourse to delay of abso- 
lution and to suitable probations. In the mean 
time, he will summon him from time to time, 
examine his predominant inclinations, and fortify 
him against those temptations, to which he finds 
him most exposed. He will insist, in case the 
sinner has injured his neighbour, on the necessity 
of his making good the injury he has caused to 
his neighbour's fortune or reputation. In fine, 
it is his dutv to exhibit towards him the solici- 
tude of a father, the tenderness of a friend, and 
the prudence of an enlightened judge : or if 
you prefer considering him under a more striking 



368 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

image, I will tell you that the art of a spiritual 
director is to apply to withered and languishing 
souls suitable remedies and succours, with the 
same zeal and attention with which a skilful 
physician applies them to bodily diseases. The 
justice of this comparison will become more 
evident from the following supposition ; for 
which I crave your indulgence. 

XX VI If. 1 will suppose, which God forbid — 
that Mr. Faber is seized with some serious attack 
of illness. The physician is sent for, and attends. 
" What ails you, my good Sir ? You seem 
" greatly reduced : where do you feel pain ?" 
"01 am very ill, my suffering is excessive." 
" How did it begin ? Where do you feel it par- 
" ticularly ?" " O, Sir, I have acted very wrong, 
" 1 acknowledge ; and I am truly sorry for it : if 
" you did but know what I suffer \" " But tell 
" me then ; is it in your head, or stomach, or 
" side ? let me know where your pain lies." 
" My pain weighs heavily upon me ; it is in- 
" tolerable ; I can tell you no more." In vain 
does the physician persist in endeavouring to 
obtain some further information, some particular 
avowal of his real situation ; he can elicit none. 



confession] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 369 

Not knowing therefore what remedies to pre- 
scribe, and fearful of bringing on his death, 
instead of promoting his recovery, quod enim 
ignorat, medicina non curat , he leaves the patient 
to himself, and to his friends, who are driven to 
despair by his obstinacy, which is so likely to 
cost him his life. But be well assured, Sir, that 
Mr. Faber would never adopt for the cure of his 
body, the plan of proceeding which he recom- 
mends you to follow for that of your soul. He 
would conceal nothing from his physician, he 
would tell him at once the cause, the seat and 
the nature of his disorder ; and he would scru- 
pulously confess the smallest circumstances, 
however slightly they might appear to aggra- 
vate his distemper. Accurately informed by 
his account, the physician would act directly 
upon the evil, and triumph over it by suitable 
remedies. Perhaps Mr. Faber might relapse from 
time to time, but he would be re-established by 
speedy recourse to the physician, whose excellent 
treatment would long preserve him to his family, 
his friends, and his dear parishioners. I shall 
not be surprised if, after reflecting on his own 
experience, he finds it not so objectionable a 

fib 



370 ANSWER TO THE j^PART III. 

plan to compare the confessor to the physician, 
the sinner to the patient, and the infirmities of 
the soul to those of the body ; and perhaps even 
ends by making trial upon his own soul of that 
very process of cure which he at present so 
unreasonably condemns in the practice of 
Catholics. 

XXIX. I have been most struck in Mr .Faber's 
work, with a certain peculiar method which I 
find him constantly pursuing. When he ap- 
plies himself to refute any one of my arguments, 
instead of bringing it forward in my own 
words, he sums it up in his own fashion, and 
says, that my whole proof reduced to regular 
form would run as a syllogism thus — or words 
to the same effect. Then he attacks his own 
syllogism, of course with ample success ; but 
leaves my real argument untouched. If I pro- 
duce the belief of the primitive and universal 
Church, he very soon substitutes for it the 
Latin Church : and by this manoeuvre, escapes 
the former, and insults the latter as he pleases. 
Am I reasoning on the real presence ? He 
makes me argue on Transubstantiation, which 
pre-supposes it certainly, yet is not identical 



confession] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 371 

with it. Speaking of that part of the secret 
discipline which regarded the Eucharist, I say 
that the real presence was the sole cause of the 
secrecy concerning the Eucharist ; but Mr. Faber 
declares to his readers, that, according to my 
account — 1st, Transubstantiation was the sole 
cause of the secret discipline. 2d, that it was 
the sole, exclusive cause of the secrecy observed 
upon the mysteries, and that 3d, it was the 
principal cause of the general discipline of the 
secret. Then he goes into a long refutation of 
these allegations attributed to me, but of which 
you will not find one syllable in either of my 
volumes. 

At page 115 he pretends that the " five first 
" centuries recognised no change save a moral 
" change in the consecrated elements" — an ex- 
pression unknown before his own time — and 
that the Church " esteemed the bread and wine 
" to be only types, or figures, or symbols, or 
" images of ... . the literal body and blood of 
" Christ." Now he has not only quoted no 
Father, nor can quote any, who has made use of 
these negative and exclusive expressions of the 

real presence ; but it is a fact on the contrary, 
b b 2 



372 ANSWER TO THE [PART III- 

that all the Fathers have professed their belief 
of the real presence. 1 have placed before you 
proofs of this ; and assuredly, if they are not 
demonstrative, there are none such in questions 
of evidence and history. At page 133 he makes 
me, and even Bossuet say, that the figure of a 
thing may be at the same time the thing itself : 
an absurdity created only in his own brain. 
For I merely said that a thing may be a sensible 
sign, a sign apparent to the senses, of another 
thing which is not so : I said that the visible and 
material species concealed the spiritualized and 
invisible body of our Saviour. 

XXX. Now, Sir, be pleased to interrogate 

Mr. Faber : call upon him most seriously to 
explain clearly to you by what right he has 
chosen to alter my expressions, and put his own 
in their place ; to impute to me opinions which 
are foreign to me, and personal to himself. Ask 
him if such a mode of refuting an antagonist be 
that of an honourable man : or if he would be 
satisfied to have such a method employed against 
himself. I appeal to your exalted mind and 
rectitude of soul : I feel assured that you will 
agree with me, that in a matter of indifference 



CONFESSION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 373 

such jugglery could be considered no better 
than low cunning, but that in religious con- 
troversy it is a crime. Is it not true moreover, 
does it not appear to your eyes as clear as to 
mine, that had he detected me in any false 
reasoning or quotation, he would have exhibited 
my false assertions, just as I had written them ? 
That he would have exposed my argumentation 
and testimonials exactly in my own words ? 
Instead of recurring to his usual skill in meta- 
morphosing and condensing my passages un- 
faithfully, he would have refuted what he had 
read in my work, and not what he had been un- 
able to find there ? From this disgraceful ma- 
noeuvring, I conclude that he found it impossi- 
ble to reply to the arguments I used, and the 
authorities I quoted : 1 conclude that he would 
have had nothing specious to write against 
either, had he not substituted his own words 
for mine, and falsely represented the Fathers of 
antiquity in contradiction to each other and to 
themselves : I conclude in fine, that the Diffi- 
culties of Romanism is the most flattering eulo- 
gium upon the Discussion Amicale, and a new 
triumph for the Catholic faith. 



374 



ANSWER TO THE 



[PART III. 



Satisfaction. 

XXXI. In his chapter on Satisfaction, I detect 
your Bachelor again ; and there you will see 
him relapsing into his habitual sin, his ruling 
infidelity. I entreat you to read this chapter X : 
he is prodigiously wrath with me for the merit 
which, he says, I attach to works of satisfaction. 
He makes a great stir to shew that neither I nor 
any one can call them meritorious : at every 
page he reproaches me with this epithet which, 
he assures his readers, is given by me to the 
satisfactions of the penitent.* I dare say, Sir, 
you are quite convinced that I do in fact speak 
of the merit of our satisfactions, that the expres- 
sion — meritorious works — occurs in my book 
frequently. Well, Sir, only be at the pains of 
looking over my 12th letter, vol. 2, and to your 
great surprise, you will neither find the merit of 

* u The bishop, not content with gratuitously carrying it 
" (the temporal punishment) into the next world, seems evi- 
" dently to consider it in the light of a meritorious expiation 
" made on our part, when we either devoutly submit to it as 
u sent from God, or when we freely and artificially inflict it 
fi4 upon ourselves" — p. 168 ; and at the bottom of the following 
page — "The bishop clearly deems them meritorious" — Et 
passim. 



SATISFACTION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 375 

our satisfactions, nor satisfactory works. These 
words, merit and meritorious, for which Mr. 
Faber so sharply reproves me, are not to be 
found at all in my letter, applied to our per- 
sonal satisfactions ; no, not in a single instance. 
What I here declare may appear bold, but it is 
perfectly true. Where then has Mr. Faber 
found these expressions ? How comes it that 
he incessantly attributes them to me, and takes 
occasion thence to reproach me ? What does he 
mean by this mode of replying to what 1 have 
never advanced ; and appearing to disregard 
what 1 have said ? I defy him to answer these 
questions satisfactorily. No doubt it would 
have pleased him to find me really attaching a 
proper, independant merit to our satisfactory 
works, as he represents me to have done. But 
fatally for his honour and good faith, I have 

done no such thing ; but have written precisely 
the contrary. My words are these, p. 215, 
vol. 2 — " Is it undervaluing the merit of the 
44 cross, to acknowledge that without the parti- 
44 cular application of its infinite merits to us, 
" it is impossible for any one to derive benefit 
44 from it ; that this application nevertheless 



376 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

" requires our co-operation, because he who 
" created us without our concurrence will not 
" save us without our concurrence ; and that 
" still our personal and satisfactory works are no 
" more in themselves than dead works, but that 
" by being united to those of our Saviour, by 
" approaching his cross, and touching the sacred 
" and life-giving wood, they derive life, strength, 
" and value, as they are then offered by Jesus 
" Christ to his Father, and in Jesus Christ, are 
" accepted by the Father ?* Is it derogatory to 
" the merit of the cross of Jesus Christ, to be- 
" come his imitators, as far as possible ; to 
" punish ourselves for our sins after his exam- 
" pie, as he was pleased that they should be 
" punished in his holy and divine person ; to 
" unite a feeble and inefficacious satisfaction to 
" that which he fully and abundantly paid for 
" us with his blood ? Tell me : is it not our 
" duty to imitate as closely as possible, Him who 
" came to be our model, and who said : 6 If any 
" man will come after me, let him take up his 
" cross and follow me ?■ And is it not manifest 
" that so far from being derogatory to the merits 
* Council of Trent, sect. xiv. ch. xviii. 



SATISFACTION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



377 



" of our Saviour, or incompatible with his suffer- 
" ings, our temporal satisfactions are absolutely 
" inseparable from them ? What then ? Be- 
" cause we cannot offer sufficient satisfaction, 
" are we to offer none ? Are we exempt from 
" all expiation, because we cannot carry it to an 
" infinite extent ? And because we are unable 
" to pay the whole debt, are we dispensed with 
" from all efforts to pay according to our 
" means ?"* Such is the passage of which Mr. 
Faber has quoted some few words. Do you find 
in it a single expression objectionable ? Do you 
see there the merit of our satisfactions, and our 
meritorious works ? I say on the contrary that 
our works are only in themselves dead works, 
and our satisfaction a feeble and inefficacious 
satisfaction. But it is not the less necessary on 
our part. Still the obligation of satisfying, and 

* I will here call to my support a grand and noble autho- 
rity : " Without the penance of our divine Saviour, yours would 
<( be unfruitful: without yours, his would remain without effect. 
<c It is his which gives value to yours, yours alone can give effect 
" to his. Let the sight of his satisfaction support and direct 
" yours ; let it be its encouragement and pattern : let it teach you 
" both the necessity and the method of putting it in practice ." 
The immortal Card. De la Luzerne in his pious and profound 
Considerations on the Passion, p. 328. 



378 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

the merit of it are different things. Mr. Faber 
has thought proper to be silent upon the words 
above in Italics, and to withhold them from his 
readers by a perfidious suppression. In place 
of them he brings forward what he wished to 
attack, and what is not there to be found— the 
merit of our works, our meritorious satisfaction. 
O equity ! O candour ! I look for you in my 
antagonist, but I cannot find you ! 

In proof of the necessity of satisfaction, I 
quoted the testimonies of Tertullian, St. 
Cyprian, St, Ambrose, and St. Augustin. — 
These are the very Fathers to whom Mr. Faber 
himself appeals at page 19, though certainly 
most unwarrantably, in favour of his moral 
change, and whose authority he there exalted to 
its deserved height. But what does he say of 
them here ? At first he does not know well 
how to understand the very clear passages by me 
adduced ; but be the case as it may, he adds : 
" If they use the term in his lordship^s apparent 
" sense, I shall have no hesitation in saying, that 
" their grossly unscriptural language merely 
" shews how soon and how easily a specious and 
" flattering corruption crept into the Church." 



satisfaction.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 379 

So modest a declaration suggests to my mind a 
parallel sufficiently rich between Mr. Faber and 
his eminent foreigner Calvin. " I am little 
" moved," says Calvin, " with what we find at 
" every step in the writings of the ancients con- 
" cerning satisfaction. I see that the greater 
" part, or, to speak more explicitly, almost all 
" those whose works remain to us, have either 
" positively erred on this subject, or have spoken 
" upon it too severely." The reformer candidly 
allows that almost all the ancient Fathers taught 
the necessity of satisfaction. Our reformed 
author does not dare to make the like avowal ; 
he still doubts : but in his hypothetic conclu- 
sions, he agrees with his honourable patron ; and 
it is easy to see that the spirit of the sire has 
descended unimpaired to his very distant pro- 
geny. Both are decisive in their decrees against 
the Fathers, and have no hesitation in arraigning 
of ignorance and error the most enlightened 
geniuses of Christianity. What blindness and 
effrontery, not to discover in themselves the igno- 
rance which they have the audacity to attribute 
to the great luminaries of antiquity ! Who can 
refrain from indignation, or at least pity, to see 



380 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

both coming forward to dictate, on an article of 
revelation, to illustrious doctors, who received 
it from the disciples of the apostles, and taught 
it with so much glory, in times when it is uni- 
versally acknowledged that faith shone in all its 
primitive splendour ? 

XXXIII. Passing, in fine, from speculation to 
practice, I exhibited the doctrine of the Fathers 
put in operation in the canonical penances, so 
generally established under the persecution of 
Decius ; a striking and inconstestable monu- 
ment of the universal belief of the necessity of 
making satisfaction to Almighty God, At the 
sight of this austere and imposing discipline, Mr. 
Faber remains dumb. He finds no answer to 
make, and is silent. I applaud his silence ; why 
did he not keep silent on all that preceded : 
He would have saved himself the displeasure 
which he has forced me to give him, and me the 
sad and truly painful duty of exposing his theo- 
logical disqualifications, and his continual for- 
getfulness of good faith and probity in contro- 
versial discussion. 



INDULGENCES.1D1FFICULT1ES OP ROMANISM. 



381 



Indulgences. 
XXXIV. Whoever rejects with Mr. Faber the 
precept of satisfying God by works of penance, 
must, with him and Calvin, not only accuse the 
Fathers of error and severity in their teaching, 
and by an inevitable consequence, the primitive 
Church of injustice in the institution of cano- 
nical and satisfactory penalties ; but disdain- 
fully refuse the helps and favours which the 
Church offers, and adds to the insufficiency of 
our satisfactions. He must dismiss with the 
multitude of fabulous inventions, the belief of a 
place of expiation, between heaven and hell, 
and send without mercy to eternal torments 
those souls who carry into the next world any 
stains contracted in this. He must consider all 
communication with his departed friends cut 
otF — renounce the consolation of interesting 
himself for their happiness, and regard the prac- 
tice of praying for them as vain and supersti- 
tious, since our prayers are alike unprofitable to 
them, whether their abode is with the elect or 
the damned, with angels or devils. Thus Mr. 
Faber will hear nothing about indulgences, or 



382 ANSWER TO THE [ PART m 

purgatory, or prayers for the dead. He reasons 
consistently, 1 acknowledge, but as he sets out 
with a false principle, his conclusions are 
equally erroneous. 

XXXV. The 12th letter of my Discussion 
Amicale established the precept of satisfaction 
to the divine justice : the 13th solidly proved 
the existence in the Church of right and power 
to grant indulgences, as also their utility and 
importance to sinners. Mr. Faber attempts in 
his 11th chapter to invalidate my proofs ; but 
in vain. You may judge by comparing our 
respective writings. 1 need not observe, that 
in this 11th chapter he incessantly puts into 
my mouth the merit of our satisfactions, our 
meritorious works and meritorious expiations. 
It is clear that he is determined to palm these 
expressions upon me, though they never pro- 
ceeded from my pen : but if he repeat them a 
hundred times in succession, so many times shall 
I reply that what he says is untrue. He main- 
tains that to attribute to the Church the power 
of granting indulgences, is as much as conceding 
to her the privilege of depriving the divine jus- 
tice of a part of the expiations otherwise due ; 



indulgences.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 383 

and this idea appears to him so luminous and 
well imagined that he repeats it in the next 
paragraph. But who was it who invested the 
Church with this high prerogative ? Was it not 
our Saviour himself? Who then can restrain 
the exercise of a right which our Saviour pro- 
mised her by those solemn words : " whatsoever 
" vou shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also 
" in heaven ?" I perceive also in page 179 that 
he would make you believe that this right be- 
longs to every priest. This is another notion 
entirely his own. Yet he ought to know that 
priests never make use of it but by delegation 
from bishops in the extent of their jurisdiction ; 
and that the power of communicating to the 
whole earth the benefit of indulgences belongs 
only to the supreme head of the universal 
Church. 

XXXVI. 1 know not, or rather 1 can pretty 
well guess, why he has chosen to misrepresent 
the affair of the incestuous Corinthian, at p. 180. 
" The Corinthians, as St. Paul expresses himself, 
" had delivered an incestuous member of their 
u community unto Satan," &c. — so says Mr. 
Faber ; but in chap. 5, of the 1st epistle, the 



384 ANSWER TO THE part III' 

apostle reproves them for having kept him in 
their community : • ■ I indeed, absent in body 
" but present in spirit, have already judged 

" to deliver such a one to Satan Your 

" glorying is not good. Know you not that a 
" little leaven corrupteth the whole lump ?" 
And in chap. 2d, of the 2d epistle : " To him 
" that is such a one, this rebuke is sufficient, 
64 that is given by many : so that contrariwise 
" you should rather forgive him, and comfort 
" him lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up 
" with over-much sorrow. Wherefore I beseech 
" you, that you would confirm your charity 
" towards him .... and to whom you have 
" forgiven any thing, I also." Therefore it was 
St. Paul who punished, and who relaxed the 
punishment. According to Mr. Faber the faith- 
ful chastised, and afterwards pardoned : 1,4 satis- 
44 fied," he says, 44 of the sincerity of the man^s 
44 contrition, they pardoned him the disgrace 
44 which he had brought upon the church, and 
44 re-admitted him to the enjoyment of his former 
44 privileges as a baptized Christian. The cir- 
44 cumstance and the ground of his re-admission 
44 were communicated to St. Paul ; and St. Paul, 



indulgences.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 385 

44 in reply, informs them, that, as they had for- 
44 given the offender, so likewise did he for their 
44 sakes in the person of Christ." Would not 
any one really say that it was decreed that this 
unfortunate Bachelor should spoil every thing 
he touched, and never represent things as they 
really are ? 

XXXVII. " The bishop," he goes on p. 18-2, 
44 has no hesitation in pronouncing, with or with- 
44 out the consent of his church, that the validity 
44 of indulgences .... entirely depends upon the 
44 dispositions of the sinner Why should Mr. 
Faber raise a doubt on this head, after reading 
the admirable dogmatical letter of the learned 
and pious pontiff who now fills, in so worthy a 
manner, the chair of St. Peter ? The principle is 
there most clearly developed * The Rev. Bache- 
lor passes next to those abuses, which in the 
16th century reflected dishonour on the publi- 
cation of indulgences ; and it may well be sup- 
posed that under his pen, these abuses would 

* I have lately read with fresh admiration this encyclical 
letter to all the bishops of the Catholic world. I wish it were 
known to Protestants : it would make on many a very different 
impression from what Mr. Faber appears to have felt from its 
perusal. 

C C 



386 ANSWER TO THE [PART ill. 

lose nothing of their enormity. " What," says 
he with much warmth, " what was the crying 
" abomination which first roused the indignant 
" spirit of the great and much -calumniated 
" Luther ?" No, Mr. Faber ; calumniated is 
not the right word. No one has painted this 
great Luther in more odious colours than him- 
self, and his associates in the work of the re- 
formation, Zwinglius and Calvin, those two 
eminent personages who composed with Luther 
the honoured triumvirate of the Rector of Long 
Newton. No one has better informed us of his 
passions and fury than his intimate, but timid 
friend, Melancthon, who complained of having 
received blows from him ; and I engage they 
were none of the lightest.* To judge by the 
original portrait which I have seen in the temple 
of Wittemberg, the vigorous reformer must have 
had a heavy hand. Taking altogether what we 
find in these four cotemporary authors concern- 
ing Luther, of the impetuosity of his passions, 
and his unbounded pride, we must feel con- 
vinced that this great, honourable, and eminent 

* " Ab ipso colaphos accepi." Epist, ad Theodor. 



INDULGENCES ] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. $g~ 

man has left nothing even for calumny itself to 
invent against him. 

To return to the abuses spoken of by Mr. 
Faber, in the publication of the indulgences of 
Leo X ; an impartial and honourable writer 
would not have failed to observe that the coun- 
cil of Lateran, under Innocent III, in 1215, and 
that of Vienne under Clement V, in 1311, had 
previously fulminated against the greater part 
of the same kind of abuses ; and that the council 
of Trent, grieving to find that the prohibitions 
of those councils had not been effectual in era- 
dicating the abuses in question, considered it 
necessary to cut to the quick, and suppressed 
the employment of questors, abolished their 
very name in detestation of their scandals, and 
ordained that in future indulgences should be 
published by the bishops * 

XXXVS1I. On the subject before us, allow 
me, Sir, to place again before you a passage in 
my Discussion Amicale, vol. 2, pp. 232, 234 : 
" If Luther, supported by the councils of Lateran, 
" Vienne, and Trent, and by the concurrent sen- 

* See Discussion Ainicale, vol. 2, p. 231. 
c c 2 



388 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt III. 

" timents of the most able divines, of such a man, 
" for instance, as Cardinal Cusa, who gained the 
" admiration of Germany in the legation which 
" he performed, and in which he published the 
" indulgence of the jubilee in 1450; if Luther 
" had only risen up against the ignorance of the 
" preachers in his time, and the disgraceful 
" traffic which was made of indulgences, he 
" would have merited the applause of the 
" Church, and of ail succeeding ages. But this 
" man of violent passions neither knew how to 
" master himself, nor curb the impetuosity which 
" urged him, step by step, to rebellion. The 
" consequences of that too celebrated dispute are 
" well known, as also how, passing on from the 
" abuse to the principle, he went so far as to 
" deny that the Church had any power to grant 
" indulgences to penitents. 

" 4 Give rather to the poor/ he exclaimed again 
" and again to his hearers, c give for the love of 
" God, to the poor the money which is demanded 
" of you for the building of St. Peter's.* Who 
" ever doubted that we ought to give to the 
u poor ? How often have churches given up 
" their vessels of gold and silver, their ornaments 



INDULGENCES.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



389 



" and jewels to feed the poor ? But does charity 
" towards our indigent brethren forbid extraor- 
" dinary succour for the erection of a temple to 
" the Lord, particularly in the mother-church ? 
64 If the abuses in collecting alms in Luther* s time 
" are to be condemned, where is the man of sense 
" and good taste who could blame the intention 
of those alms ? Surely none of those who 
" have visited and admired that church, the most 
" worthy monument which men ever erected 
" with their feeble hands to the supreme majesty 
"of God." 

Mr. Faber interprets in his own way my 
silence on the subject of the riches which con- 
stitute the inexhaustible treasure of indul- 
gences. It is clear however that 1 had no need 
to repeat what is written in all the jubilee 
bulls, and in every elementary book on indul- 
gences. This treasure is composed of the merits 
of Jesus Christ, with which are associated those 
of such holy persons, who by an especial grace, 
led upon earth a life of innocence and purity. 
Their charitable and angelic works, ever united 
to those of our divine Saviour, derived during 
this life all their merit from their union with our 



390 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

Saviour's merits, in the same manner as after 
death, they derive all their merit from the infinite 
merits of the God-man. What can be objected 
to in this doctrine ? In truth, to find any thing 
here which we should blush to acknowledge, can 
only be done by a head deplorably disordered 
by prejudice. He that would cast ridicule on 
this pious and ancient belief, would only bring 
derision upon himself. 

Prayers for the Dead — Purgatory. 

XXXIX. I had joined Purgatory and Prayers 
for the dead in one article ; because the custom 
of praying for the dead evidently pre-supposes 
the belief of a middle place between heaven and 
hell ; and because when we shew this practice in 
the primitive Church, we, by this single fact, 
demonstrate her belief in this middle state, where 
souls are purified from every stain, before they 
are admitted to the abode of innocence either 
preserved or recovered. Now what does Mr. 
Faber ? He separates prayers for the dead from 
purgatory, in order to deprive them of their 
natural support, and attack them singly with 
greater advantage. You will see that he sue- 



PURGATORY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 391 

ceeds none the better. But it must be acknow- 
ledged that these two chapters display more of 
the artful sophistry which lie habitually exer- 
cises, and uniformly with a tone of assurance, 
calculated to impose upon readers unable to 
detect it. He sets out in his usual manner with 
making me say what I never did say, and even 
affecting to compliment me. " The bishop 
" fairly and honestly confesses, that we have re- 
" ceived no revelation concerning it from Jesus 
" Christ. " No, Sir, 1 have no claim to the fairness 
and honesty of such a confession, for 1 never made 
it : and he w ho would compliment me, ought 
to know that I maintain precisely the contrary, 
in the following words, p. 248, vol. 2 : " Let us 
" go farther, and boldly assert that Jesus Christ 
" did himself approve and recommend this prac- 
" tice to his disciples," (praying for the dead.) 

I said, " There must remain for the most part, 
" much to expiate in the other world. But where ? 
" In what place and manner ? Had it been 
" necessary for us to be informed on these points, 
" doubtless Jesus Christ would have revealed 
" them to us. He has not done so : and there- 
V fore we can only form more or less probable 



39& ANSWER TO THE [part in 

" conjectures." Here Mr. Faber omits the in- 
terrogations, and after reporting only the an- 
swer, he concludes thus : 44 The doctrine, then, 
44 of purgatory is confessedly not a matter of 
44 revelation : whether it be true or false, we 
44 confessedly cannot ascertain from any thing 
44 that Christ has said on the subject/' (P. 186.) 
Thus he makes me speak of the existence of 
purgatory, when I am only treating of its loca- 
lity. In his note at the next page, he does pretty 
nearly the reverse. — I observed in a note, p. 243, 
v. 2, as follows : 44 You admit limbo, because its 
44 existence is proved to you, although its situa- 
• 4 tion remains unknown. Let it equally satisfy 
44 you to be assured of the existence of purgatory, 
44 without troubling yourself to discover its local 
44 position." But Mr. Faber distorts my reason- 
ing in this manner : 44 You believe the existence 
44 of such a place, though its local position is 
44 unknown to you. Rest then assured of the 
44 existence of purgatory, though we may not be 
44 able to define its strict local position." Is this 
what I said ? Would any man of good sense 
have reasoned in such a manner? Mr. Faber 
gravely reminds his countrymen that 44 the point 



purgatory] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 393 

" at issue is not the locality but the existence of 
" purgatory as if I had spoken of the former 
" only and not of the latter ! I hope, Sir, you 
will pity the unfortunate lot of the Discussion 
Amicale to have fallen into hands so little dis- 
posed to be amicable. 

XL. In the succeeding page I find again his 
meritorious expiation. He repeats it for ever ; 
persuafling himself, no doubt, that by continu- 
ing to impute it to me, he shall at last succeed 
in making it pass as mine ; and by perseverance 
in bringing it forward, from false, he shall 
render it authentic. How pitiful are all such 
artifices ! And how necessary is patience to 
endure such a tissue of false imputations, joined 
to infidelities so often repeated ! With a candid 
and able antagonist, I should have had, no doubt, 
points of erudition to clear up, and important 
difficulties to resolve. But assuredly I should 
not have found what I have had to expose in this 
third part of my answer. We are not yet at 
the end of these unpleasant subjects : there are 
many more to claim our attention. 

XLI. I shewed that the practice of praying 
for the dead was anterior to Christianity by the 



394 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

book of Macchabees, which is deutero-canonical, 
but not, as Mr. Faber would have it, apocryphal. 
For the third Council of Carthage, resting on 
tradition, St. Augustin, Innocent I. and Gela- 
sius, with 70 bishops, place it in the rank of 
divine Scripture. I said, that though its cano- 
nicity had been doubted for a time, its historical 
truth had never been questioned. This ought 
certainly to suffice to shew that praying for the 
dead was in use among the Jews before our 
Saviour, who would not have failed to turn 
them from it, if he had judged the custom bad 
and superstitious. 

I afterwards shewed in concert with celebrated 
doctors of your own, that this practice prevailed 
in the primitive Church, from the testimonies of 
Tertullian, S. S. Cyprian, Chrysostom, Epipha- 
nius, Jerome, and Augustin ; I shewed that 
Origen, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Gregory 
of Nyssa, had acknowledged by name a middle 
place, where souls must be purified from all de- 
filement before they could enter heaven. What 
reply does Mr. Faber make ? 1st. He opposes 
to them the silence of the apostolic Fathers, as if 
in the small number of their writings which have 



purgatory] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 395 

come down to us, they had been able to treat of 
every point of doctrine, and their negative testi- 
mony could overturn the positive attestation of 
the others. 2dly. He observes that the oldest of 
my authorities goes no farther back than the 
end of tiie second century, namely Tertullian ; 
who, he says, was too far from the apostles, to 
justify us in grounding upon him an apostolical 
tradition. I will just observe, in my turn, that 
Mr. Faber himself brought Tertullian against 
me, when he believed that Father's testimony in 
favour of his cause : then he was represented as 
close to the days of the apostles. But it is not 
the authority of Tertullian to which 1 wish in 
this place to appeal, but solely to his evidence. 
Tertullian, who died in 216, at the age of 84, 
must have been born in 132. He was brought 
up at Rome, where he studied the law, leading at 
that time a dissolute life, and ridiculing the 
Christians, as he himself informs us. He entered 
upon the examination of Christianity, through 
mere curiosity, embraced it, became its illustri- 
ous defender against pagans and heretics, and 
found himself involved in the great affairs of the 
Church. What better informed or more strictly 



396 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

upright witness of what was then practised in 
the churches could be desired ? He speaks of 
praying for the dead as an universal practice, 
and ranks it with the points taught by tradi- 
tion. Now what think you of a practice univer- 
sally established and come down by tradition, 
less than 72 years after St. John ? Can it, I ask 
you, be other than apostolical ? Will there be a 
man of sense among us, who will be persuaded 
by the assertion of Mr. Faber, and contrary to 
that of so grave a witness of the second century, 
that this practice so far from belonging to tradi- 
tion, proceeded from an error newly broached 
at a period when, as the reformed churches 
acknowledge, doctrine flourished in its native 
integrity and purity ? 

XLH. But let us come to an argument which 
will cut short all the entangled confusion in 
which Mr. Faber envelopes his readers and him- 
self, and demonstrate that praying for the dead 
is not, as he calls it, a crude phantasy started by 
the " imaginative" Tertullian. All the liturgies 
published from the Council of Ephesus to the 
16th century, Catholic, Nestorian, Eutychian, 
Malabar, Chaldean, Egyptian, Abyssinian, and 



PURGATORY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 397 

Ethiopian ; those of Constantinople, of the 
Greeks, Syrians, whether Orthodox or Jaco- 
bites ; those of St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, St. 
James, explained in the fourth century by St. 
Cyril of Jerusalem ; that, in fine, of the aposto- 
lic constitutions written before the others in the 
third century — all are uniform on the subject of 
praying for the dead. I have given extracts 
from them in my Appendix, vol. 2, p. 259. Mr. 
Faber does not say a word about them : he 
would make it appear that he did not observe 
them. But pray ask him to account for this uni- 
formity in the Liturgies of churches separated 
in the fifth century. If he fail, all well informed 
divines will answer you in the words of your 
own Bishop Bull : " All the Christian churches 
44 in the world, however distant from each other, 
" agree in the prayer of the oblation of the Chris- 
44 tian sacrifice in the Holy Eucharist, or Sacra- 
44 ment of the Lord's Supper ; (and the same 
44 applies to prayers for the dead) which consent 
44 is indeed wonderful. All the ancient liturgies 
44 agree in this form of prayer, almost in the same 
44 words, but fully and exactly in the same sense, 
44 order, and method ; which whoever attentively 



398 ANSWER TO THE [part Hi, 

44 considers, must be convinced, that this order of 
44 prayer was delivered to the several churches in 
44 the very first plantation and settlement of 
44 them."* 

Mr. Faber, fond of carping at words, will say 
that the liturgies did not suppose souls to be in 
what we understand by Purgatory. But let 
him cavil as he pleases against our denomination 
of Pttrgatory, it is certain that the ancients did 
not pray for the inhabitants of heaven, nor of 
hell. Where then dwelt the souls for whom 
they prayed ? In what place ? He may call it 
by what name he chooses ; we dispute not about 
the name, but the thing. Let him pray in the 
style of the ancient liturgies, and say with the 
apostolic constitutions : 44 Vouchsafe, O God, to 
44 look upon thy servant whom thou hast made 
44 to pass into another state. Pardon him if he 
44 has sinned wilfully, or involuntarily. Place 
44 him in the bosom of the patriarchs, prophets, 
44 apostles, and all those who had the happiness 
<4 to please tbee here below." Let him make 
such a prayer in all sincerity: we shall for the 
present require no more of him. 

* Bp. Bull on Common Prayer j sermon 12, toI. 1. 



PUR«ATORY] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 399 

XLIII. The Rev. Bachelor, at page 191, brings 
against me a passage from St Cyprian, and at 
p. 200 a sentence from Tertullian. The latter 
is as follows : " On a certain annual day we 
" make oblations for the dead and for nativities." 
Mr. Faber has very justly observed that the 
nativities indicate the days on which the de- 
parted saints dying to the world, were born to 
immortality. But he did not observe that Ter- 
tullian has distinguished the dead from the 
nativities ; that is, those who had died a natural 
death, from those who had lost their lives to 
receive the crown of martyrdom. The obla- 
tions were the same, says Mr. Faber. Un- 
doubtedly they were ; for it was, and always 
will be, the oblation of the sacrifice of the new 
law, bloody upon the cross, but unbloody upon 
our altars. It is therefore necessarily one and 
the same. But the prayers which accompany it 
were, and always will be different for the saints, 
and for the common faithful departed. They 
made commemoration of the elect of both testa- 
ments, to thank and glorify God in their per- 
sons ; and generally of all that died, to beg of 
God to pardon them, and fix them in a place 



400 ANSWER TO THE [ PART 

of light, repose and happiness. This, all the 
liturgies of antiquity uniformly shew. Would 
Mr. Faber wish for a proof from Tertullian 
himself? Let him read No. 10 of his book of 
Monogamy. Tertullian speaking of the wife 
who survives her husband, desires that thence- 
forth in her widowhood " She should pray for 
" the soul of her husband, solicit for him re- 
" freshment, and offer on the anniversaries of 
" his death." " Pro animd ejus (mariti) oret, 
" refrigerium interim adpostulet, et offerat die- 
" bus dormitationis ejus." Dormitationes ex- 
pressed natural deaths ; natalitia, the birth of 
the martyrs and saints to immortality. Doubt- 
less Mr. Faber will now reproach himself with 
having made Tertullian contradict himself, as 
well the liturgies, which certainly he constantly 
frequented after his conversion to Christianity. 

I trust he will find equal reason to reprove 
himself with regard to St. Cyprian, who in the 
passage quoted at p. 191 begins with these 
words : " When once departed this life, there is 
" no longer any place for repentance, nor for 
" satisfaction." The last word must have cost 
Mr. Faber a great deal ; his hand must have 



PURGATORY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 401 

trembled as he wrote it. I axn sorry to have 
again to bring it before him : 44 What do they 
44 mean," said this Father, to those who recon- 
ciled sinners before the time, 44 but that Jesus 
" Christ shall be less appeased by prayers and 
44 satisfactions P But that sins shall no more 
44 be redeemed by just satisfactions .<?.... Let 
44 every deep wound have long and careful 
" treatment : let not the penance be less than 
44 the crime."* And again : 44 Behold the greatest 
M wounds of sin, behold the greatest trangres- 
" sions ; to have sinned, and not to satisfy : to 
44 have offended, and not to weep." But I am 
fatiguing Mr. Faber's ear too much with the 
disagreeable words, satisfy and satisfaction. 
Let us return to the contradiction which would 
result from the passage quoted and explained 
by Mr. Faber, and that adduced by me in the 
Discussion Amicale. Mine is as follows : 44 Our 
44 predecessors prudently advised that no bro- 
44 ther departing this life, should nominate any 
44 churchman his executor ; and should he do it, 

* Lei. 5b to Pope Cornelius. " Ecce majora peccati vul- 
44 nera, ecce majora delicta; peccasse, nee satisfacere; deli- 
u quisse, nec flere." 

Dd 



402 ANSWER TO THE [PART III. 

" that no oblation should be made for him, nor 
" sacrifice offered for his repose." And he adds 
that Victor having contrary to this law, nomi- 
nated the priest Faustinus his executor, " non 
" est quod pro dormitione ejus apud vos fiat 
" oblatio, ant deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus in 
" ecclesid frequentetur." It is evident that this 
law, and its application to Victor, suppose the 
custom of praying for the dead anterior to St. 
Cyprian. But Mr. Faber would have it, that 
according to the doctrine of that illustrious 
primate, there were only heaven or hell to be 
expected after death. Were that the case, it 
would be alike evident that this great man con- 
tradicted himself. 

But let us comfort ourselves for the honour 
of St. Cyprian, with the assurance that the con- 
tradiction is entirely the act of his interpreter. 
The works of penance and satisfaction belong 
only to this life : they are strangers to the other 
world : purgatory knows them not. That is 
the abode of sorrowful expiations : there puri- 
fication is effected by suffering. Yet who 
would not think himself happy in this life, if he 
were certain of going thither at his death ? St. 



PURGATORY] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 403 

Cyprian then would have had reason to say, 
that even when satisfaction remains to be made 
in the next world, we pass from this life to a 
blessed immortality. But must he by this 
blessed immortality have meant heaven ? Even 
so it is unquestionable, that after we have done, 
as he requires elsewhere and supposes here, 
penance proportionable to the sins which it has 
been our misfortune to commit, we pass imme- 
diately from death to eternal happiness. But 
what I have here said regards only Christians, 
and I acknowledge that St. Cyprian in this 
place is not addressing them. He is writing to 
a pagan named Demetrianus. What then is the 
case ? He seeks to attract him to Christianity ; 
he exposes the danger of deferring his conver- 
sion, and places before his eyes the salutary 
effects of faith, which from repentance and con- 
fession necessarily leads to baptism, and thus 
opens the gate of heaven to those who have just 
received the grace of regeneration. 

You see that the passage brought against me 
is by no means incompatible with purgatory, 
and that admitting this abode of temporary 

expiation, St. Cyprian might well express him- 
d d 2 



404 ANSWER TO THE [part it*. 

self as he did, whether you extend his expres- 
sions to Christians who had or had not entirely 
satisfied the divine justice in this life ; or confine 
them to the pagan Demetrianus ; and since it 
cannot be doubted, after what I have quoted 
from St. Cyprian, that in his time, and long 
before, praying for the dead was in use, that 
explanation must absolutely be admitted which 
makes the saint consistent with himself, with 
the practice of the Church, and with the apos- 
tolic liturgies. 

Mr. Faber looks well indeed, when at p. 204 
he tells us with perfect satisfaction at his per- 
formance : " Cyprian I have already disposed 
" of."* 

XLIV. Enquire, I entreat you, Sir, of your 
learned Thorndyke ; he will tell you : " One 
" subject of reformation, in my opinion, would 
" be to re-establish prayers for the dead, accord- 
" ing to the primitive sentiment of the universal 
" Church : and I maintain that the suppression 
" of such prayers, was not retrenching an abuse, 
" but cutting to the very quick." Listen to 
Bishops Forbes, Barrow, Sheldon, Blandford, 
* Epilogue, p. 337. 



PURGATORY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



405 



&c* Compare jour modern divines with their 
predecessors ; and you will see that instead of 
returning to antiquity, they every day depart 
more widely from it. They have taught you to 
believe that death breaks off all communication 
between those who remain upon earth, and 
those who have quitted it. Thus you have ac- 
companied your relations and friends with tears 
to the grave : but the stone once closed down 
upon them, you have left them to their fate. 
You have hoped, it is true, that they were happy, 
but without daring to pray for their happiness 
to the sovereign Judge. I am well assured that 
your affection for them was not extinguished 
with their life : but it remained sterile and un- 
profitable to them. Educated in the unhappy 
principles of a sombre and discouraging creed, 
you have never yet known the secret calm and 
resignation infused by the thought that we can 
benefit our dear friends beyond the tomb. Enter 
at least now upon this solid and consolatory 
belief. Were it imaginary, were it an illusion, 
it would still be delightful ; and cruel is that 
reformation which presumes to forbid it. But 
* See Discussion Amiatle, vol. 2, pp. 254, 255, 256. 



406 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

it is incontestable, and a matter of primitive 
tradition ; you have seen that it is built upon 
the teaching of the apostles, and consequently 
upon that of their divine Master. Hearken then 
no more to those ignorant and unfeeling sophists, 
who strive to deprive you of a resource so pre- 
cious to those whose lot it is to survive. Prac- 
tice it henceforth ; betake yourself to it with 
confidence ; I venture to affirm that you will 
find it a source of hope, of tender feelings and 
pious emotions. 

Invocation of Saints. 

XLV. Mr. Faber's chapter XV. is a succession 
of faults, mistakes, and infidelities, which it 
would be too long and tedious to exhibit piece 
bv piece. He had just before blamed me for 
adducing Tertullian as a witness of the primitive 
faith ; and here he himself would have this pri- 
mitive doctrine estimated by the single testimony 
of St. Epiphanius who lived two centuries later ! 
I had said that Asterius implored of Phocas that 
intercession which he himself had solicited and 
obtained of the martyrs ; and he makes me say — 
p. 227 — that Asterius begged " that Phocas, in 



saints] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 407 

" the plenitude of his power , (these words are an 
" addition of Mr. Faber's) would give to his 
" survivors those blessings which he himself pos- 
" sessed ! " I quoted in favour of the Invocation 
of Saints, St. Irenseus, Origen, St. Athanasius, 
Eusebius, St, Ephrem, St. Augustin, St. Am- 
brose, and the Councils of Ep lies us and Chalce- 
don, that is to say, the brilliant ages of the 
Church, admitted as such by the most able Pro- 
testants ; and this man reproves me for so doing ! 
He does not then comprehend how these 
great doctors, these learned bishops, revered as 
saints even by the followers of the reformation, 
could have been other than idolaters ! Nor does 
he blush to charge them with idolatry, by attri- 
buting sentiments to them which they never 
entertained ! Let it suffice for me to reply that 
the testimonies of these great personages of anti- 
quity will undoubtedly weigh a little more 
towards establishing the apostoliciiy of any 
dogmatical usage, than the high authority of the 
Rector of Long Newton, towards overturning it. 

XLVL He next proceeds to shew, p. 231, that 
the idolatry of the early ages has passed down 
from hand to hand in the Catholic Church, 



408 ANSWER TO THE [PART III. 

where it still holds sovereign sway. He quotes 
from the Hours according to the use of Salis- 
bury, and draws his proofs from the comments 
upon them left us by the learned and truth-tel- 
ling Burnet. He sets out with informing us 
that these Hours were even printed at Paris in 
1520 ; and with powerful logic he concludes 
from their Parisian date that it seems abundantly 
evident that they met with very general accepta- 
tion among what the bishop styles the Catholic 
body. Let us not disturb him in the " abundant 
evidence" of his splendid conclusion. Without 
taking the trouble to search out the old rubric 
of Sarum, he need only have opened our brevia- 
ries and the liturgical books in daily use among 
us. He would have found there the same hymns, 
the same invocations to the blessed Virgin and 
the Saints ; and with the honest and charitable 
industry which he is so fond of exercising, he 
might have easily changed our prayers into acts 
of detestable idolatry. 

Would you wish to know, Sir, how he pro- 
ceeds to convert our devotions into idolatry ? 
He separates certain passages, certain words, 
suppresses those that precede or follow, and 



SAINTS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 409 

thus by a very honest process, he succeeds in 
giving ihem a sense which they were never meant 
to convey. In the hymn to the blessed Virgin 
which so particularly offends him, he suppresses 
this verse : 

Monstra te esse matrem, 

Surnat per tepreces, 

Qui pro nobis natus, 

Tulit esse tuus. 
As also the words, bona cuncta posce, and con- 
sequently all those good things expressed in the 
insulated verses produced by Mr. Faber. In 
this manner those words which serve to explain 
all the rest, are adroitly concealed by him. He 
only exhibits such passages as he chose to extract, 
in imitation of his master, the faithful Burnet ; 
and thus the hymn appears entirely covered 
with a shining varnish of idolatry. 

You will readily conceive that Mr. Faber has 
taken good care not to let those versicles and 
prayers appear which follow the above hymn, 
and all those which we address to the blessed 
Virgin. One of the versicles is as follows ; " Pray 
" for us, O holy Mother of God ; that we may be 
" made worthy of the promises of Christ." In 



410 ANSWER TO THE [part lit. 

the subsequent prayers, you will find the inter- 
cession expressed in direct terms : " intercedente 
" sanctissima Dei genitrice. — Beatce Virginis 
" MaricB intercessio gloriosa nos protegat ; Gene- 
" tricis Filii tui intercessione salvemur, fyc" — 
Mr. Faber would have apparently required that 
the word intercession should be repeated in every 
verse. I fear Mr. Faber is no poet ; if he is, he 
must know that the measure would not admit 
of all this dogmatical exactness, and that the 
short lines of our hymns reject words of five 
syllables. Let him not then be so hard upon 
our sacred poets, but allow them some licence in 
favour of metre and precision ; and instead of 
interrupting their free and rapid course, assist 
their words by supposing throughout, what they 
every where wish to be understood. 

But on the contrary, he is so blinded by the 
mania of viewing us as absolute idolaters, that 
he does not observe the intercession of Mary 
traced by his own hand in the very prayers 
which he quotes, and in which he pretends that 
we invoke her as omnipotent. P. 232 — u By 
" thy pious intervention wash away our sins." — 
" Have me excused with Christ thy Son" P. 233 



/ 



SAINTS.] 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMAN ISM. 



411 



— u Pray for the people, interpose on behalf of the 
^ clergy, intercede for the devout female sex." He 
gravely attributes the prayer containing these 
last words to the church of Salisbury, and little 
suspects that it is taken word for word from St. 
Augustin, from an admirable prayer composed 
by that splendid genius, and which the Bachelor 
would not repeat or report without horror. 

For our part, Sir, we have been taught by 
pious and learned antiquity to invoke the most 
holy of creatures, Mary, mother of our Saviour, 
and all the Saints ; and they solicit in our behalf. 
Our invocation is made upon earth ; their inter- 
cession, in heaven. Thus a continual religious 
intercourse is kept up between the inhabitants 
of both worlds, between the blessed who enjoy 
the happiness of heaven, and mortals exposed to 
the dangers of a life of storms and tribulations. 
This is what we call the Communion of Saints, 
a consoling doctrine, a source of charming and 
pure delights of which you would partake with 
us, if your dry and gloomy doctrines had not 
taught you to dread it as a fanciful bug-bear. 

XLVII. We have told your divines a hundred 
times, and we will not cease to tell them till at 



412 ANSWER TO THE [ PART m . 

last we drive it into their heads, that idolatry is 
no less odious to us, than to them ; that we reject 
the very idea of it far from us in our prayers ; 
that we should hold it blasphemy to say to the 
most holy of creatures what we address to Jesus 
Christ, and blasphemy to address Jesus Christ 
as we do holy creatures. Witness our litanies, 
where we repeat to the blessed Virgin Mary and 
the Saints : " pray for us but to Jesus Christ, 
" have mercy on us — deliver us — graciously hear 
" us." In a word, however strong may be the 
poetical expressions in our hymns, intercession 
is always understood by us of necessity and 
right, whenever it is not repeated. Mr. Faber 
had very judiciously observed, p. x. of his pre- 
face, that " to charge a Latin (a Catholic) with 
" what he holds not, and then gravely to confute 
u opinions which all the while he strenuously 
" disclaims, is alike unfair and unprofitable." 
And here he is employing this unfair and unpro- 
fitable method himself ! Ex ore tuo te judico ( 
Let him cease therefore to contradict himself, to 
condemn himself, and to bring against us a 
charge of idolatry, which we shall never cease 
to repel with all the energy in our power. 



RELICS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 413 

For the rest, be it known to him, for he has 
forgotten what he must have read in the book 
which he professed to adopt as a text for his 
refutation — be it known to him that though we 
admit the invocation of saints as useful and pro- 
fitable, we do not hold it to be absolutely neces- 
sary, acting according as the council of Trent 
has decided. What does he mean then by the 
conclusion of his note at p. 234, and the quota- 
tions which overturn his thesis instead of sup- 
porting it ? What signifies the question pro- 
posed with such assurance to his readers, with 
an emphatical tone completely ridiculous ? 
" When such rituals were approved and com- 
" monly used in the Latin Church of the West, 
" was, or was not, a reformation necessary V s 
In my turn, I have a question to put to him, 
resting on a very different foundation. Let 
him produce an answer. " All that uproar and 
" overthrow of everything religious and political, 
" was it, or was it not necessary to abolish that 
" which was never held to be necessary ? 

Relics. 

Let us endeavour to come to a conclusion : 



414 ANSWER TO THE [part Hi* 

for in truth, disgust makes the pen drop out of 
my hand ; and yet the most odious parts would 
remain to be refuted, were I as much affected 
at the insults offered to me, as at those directed 
against truth and religion. I will confine 
myself now to a few passing reflections, short 
and rapid. And first, on the subject of Relics , 
I must observe, what I have already had to re- 
mark over and over again, that the Bachelor 
makes me still say what I never did say, and 
even the very opposite to my own words ; and 
that he delights in repeating it, in order to 
impress it upon his readers. The following are 
my words at the bottom of p. 309, vol. 2. 
" They talk of the erroneous and superstitious 
" notions, which people have often entertained 
" on the subject of relics ; I do not deny that 
" such has been the case/'* Mr. Faber gives 
my sentence as follows : " Men talk of erroneous 
" and superstitious notions, which we have often 
" taken up concerning relics : but I have never 
" been able to discover them" — page 245. You 

* On parle de notions, erronees, superstitieuses, que les 
peuples out souvent prises sur les reliques ; je n'en discon- 
viendrai pas. 



RELICS] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 415 

see he exhibits throughout, the same tactics, the 
same upright and honourable proceedings ! 

The Rev. Bachelor next affects the esprit fort 
on the subject of miracles wrought by occasion 
and in presence of relics : he will not even listen 
to those which he rinds solemnly^ attested by 
such illustrious men as St. Cyril of Alexandria, 
or St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Ambrose, an eye- 
witness equally with St. Augustin, who was 
then at Milan. See Discussion Amicale, vol. 2, 
p. 315. Let us congratulate the Bachelor on 
his high opinion of his own wisdom, and the 
perfect self-confidence which he perpetually 
exhibits. Rest assured, Sir, that he knows 
much more about what took place at Milan 
nearly 1500 years ago, than the learned and 
holy archbishop of that metropolis ; who when 
he learnt that certain Arians in that city called 
in question the miraculous cure of a blind man, 
of which he himself had been an eye-witness, 
mounted the pulpit the following day, and 
publicly proved the fact before an immense 
assembly. 



416 



ANSWER TO THE 



PART III. 



The Sign of the Cross. 
But the powers of vision possessed by the 
oracle seated in Durham, penetrate still farther 
into the darkness of remote ages. Go and con- 
sult him at Long Newton ; ask him why the 
Christians in the second century signed their 
foreheads with the sign of the cross, when they 
arose in the morning, when they lay down at 
night, before work, before and after meals, &c. 
Ask him the reason ; he will tell you, and be 
sure to rely on his word, do not listen to such a 
man as Tertuliian. This Father acknowledges 
that such a custom observed so faithfully did not 
come from any gospel precept, but solely from 
tradition. You will perfectly understand what 
must have been the source of a custom estab- 
lished by tradition in the second century. But 
Mr. Faber decidedly pronounces that it did not 
come from tradition ; he understands and main- 
tains that it is no older than Tertuliian ; that 
the custom and the Father entered the world 
much about the same time— p. 286. it is evi- 
dent that his ideas must be more correct than 
those of the learned African, as to what was be- 



CROSS.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 417 

lieved and practised seventy years after St. John 
the Evangelist. Happy is the Church of Eng- 
land to foster in her bosom so bright and even 
miraculous a luminary ! Really the more I 
think, the more I am persuaded that this gentle- 
man must be inspired : and here is my proof. — 
If he were not, could he himself go so far as to 
imagine that he knows the second century better 
than the most admired man of that period ? 
Would he dare to give the lie to that celebrated 
personage, and on a fact in its nature so notorious, 
since the old men of that time must have known 
perfectly well whether when they were young 
people they made the sign of the cross ? How 
then stands the case ? Tertullian attests that the 

practice of signing the cross on the forehead came 
from a custom more ancient and handed down 
by tradition ; and here Mr. Faber says to him in 
equivalent terms : " It is not so ; but the prac- 
" tice began in your own time ; you saw its 
" beginning ; and I am even tempted from your 
" evident peevishness when asked for a scriptural 
" proof of its obligation, to suspect that you 
" may have been the author of it yourself/' This 
language proves indisputably one of these two 

e e 



418 ANSWER TO THE [PART III. 

things ; either inspiration, or a certain degree of 
folly. But assuredly a grave and learned rector 
could not be accused of the latter. Therefore we 
must acknowledge his inspiration. 

I observe that towards the end of the Difficul- 
ties of Romanism, Mr. Faber no longer admits 
any authority but Scripture. If he does not 
find there every letter of what you maintain 
against him, he accuses you without ceremony 
of gross ignorance, and mere unscriptural super- 
stition. At the beginning he was more polite, 
and more respectful towards oral and primi- 
tive traditions. He did homage to them ; h* 
acknowledged their authority : several times ht 
attempted to support himself upon them against 
my assertions ; and it has been seen with what 
success. However, 1 content myself here with 
observing that on the Invocation of Saints, Relics, 
and the Sign of the Cross he pays no longer any 
regard to primitive traditions, and those autho- 
rities which he delighted to quote when he con- 
ceived them favourable to his cause. This con- 
tradiction of mind and opinion is not exactly 
insanity ; it would be wrong to pronounce it so: 
it is only caprice, and versatility of principle. 



CH OF ENG.] 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



419 



The Church of England. 
L. By beginning his refutation with my third 
Letter, after announcing in his preface that he 
should follow me step by step, Mr. Faber led me 
to believe that he considered it most prudent 
not to enter upon the discussion of the two pre- 
ceding Letters. I had no expectation of what 1 
discovered as 1 advanced further in my replv, 
that he had deferred the examination of the first 
to the second Chapter of his Book II. page 309. 
He has nothing to say against the historical 
summary of the establishment of the Anglican 
Church, at the beginning of my work. He 
attacks the consequences which I deduced from 
it, but he does not in the least invalidate them. 
They remain strictly correct, and my arguments 
retain all their strength * 

* Mr. Faber has no just Llea of the jurisdiction and cha- 
racter of a bishop. He confounds the one with the other in 
what, he calls the power nf order. Consecration gives the cha- 
racter : mission imparts jurisdiction, which is lost by schism, 
while the character remains, because that is indelible. If the 
consecration of Parker had been valid, he would have received 
the character, but not jurisdiction ; which the four consecrators, 
being in open revolt against the Church, could not have, and of 
course could not impart to him. — When speaking of the sub- 

Ee 2 



420 ANSWER TO THE [ PA rt III. 

I argued the nullity of your church establish- 
ment, not from the character of Elizabeth, as 
Mr. Faber supposes, but from her radical defect 
of competency. The only method by which he 
could refute me, would have been to prove that 
Elizabeth had a right to bring about the change 
which she effected by violence ; and this he has 
not even attempted to demonstrate. On the 
contrary, you shall see how he himself furnishes 
me with a fresh proof of the incompetency of 
that Queen. " Suppose," says he, p. 314, " that 
" we were deprived of our present legal esta- 
" blishment : what would be the consequence ? 
" Should we lose our spiritual authority as 
" bishops or as presbyters ? Such, I apprehend, 
" would by no means be the result .... The 
" spiritual power of order we assuredly derived 
" not from Elizabeth : hence, of that power no 
" present or future Sovereign of England can 
" deprive us." It is certain that temporal rulers 
have only a right to take away what they gave. 

mission due to the successor of St. Peter, and head of the univer- 
sal Church, Mr. Faber allows himself to designate him disdain- 
fully as " an Italian prelate," " a bishop of Italy," he only adds 
a pitiful insult to his bad defence of a worse cause. 



CH. of ENG.] DIFFICULTIES OF HOMANISM. 



421 



It is equally certain that they never could give 
spiritual authority ; nor in consequence, take it 
away. Therefore Elizabeth could not take away 
spiritual authority from the Catholic bishops, 
who occupied their sees, before she occupied her 
throne. Therefore they preserved their autho- 
rity : therefore the successors she gave them 
were mere intruders, without power, and with- 
out jurisdiction. In a word, Elizabeth had 
undoubtedly a right to deprive the Catholic 
bishops of their palaces, their revenues, and 
their places in parliament : for they held these 
temporal advantages from the Crown : but their 
spiritual power came not from the Crown, as 
Mr. Faber has so justly maintained. I was 
right then in saying, and he must from his own 
principles acknowledge it ; that " without a 
" right to throw down, and without a right to 
" re-build, her (Elizabeth's) undertaking was 
" nul] from the beginning."* 

* See vol. 1, p. 12, of the Discussion Amicale, a very striking 
passage from Dodwell quoted in a note. It seems to have been 
written expressly to demonstraie the nullity of your ecclesias- 
tical constitution through the incompetency of the Queen and 
her parliament. It is also quoted in the 1st part ch. 1, no. 2, 
of the present Answer. 



422 ANSWER TO THE [part hi 

Supremacy. 
LI. In chapter 111. page 319, Mr. Faber enters 
upon a long dissertation, which corresponds to 
no part of my work. He directs it against the 
primacy of the holy see, and begins by justify- 
ing the separation under Elizabeth, by the right 
which he attributes to every national church to 
choose such a form of government for herself, as 
she shall think proper ; as if it could be proper 
to choose for herself any other, than the one 
which Jesus Christ himself traced out for the 
universal Church. Bp. Jewel in his apology, 
justifies the schism by the necessity of departing 
from a church degenerated, and disfigured by 
her innovations, her idolatry, and her errors, on 
the subject of the real presence ; thus designating 
as innovations, errors and idolatry, the dogmas 
which you have seen taught and practised by 
the primitive Church. 

Mr. Faber proceeds next to the supremacy ; 
against which he renews old attacks, a hundred 
times repelled, and with which, for that reason, 
I shall not here occupy my attention. I shall 
only make some rapid reflections on certain 
allegations contained in this chapter. 



SUPREMACY] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 423 

According to this author, and in opposition to 
the universal belief of all parties, St. Peter is not 
to be considered as the first Bishop of Rome, 
but St. Linus. The proof he adduces is pre- 
cisely the proof of the contrary. For he insists 
that St. Linus was chosen by the common con- 
sent of St. Peter and St. Paul. But before the 
arrival of St. Paul, at Rome, St. Peter had 
founded the church there, and governed it for 
some years. Therefore he was its first Bishop ; 
and St. Linus was called in the same manner as 
St. Ignatius was of Antioch, the first Bishop of 
that See after St. Peter. For this reason, St. 
Irenseus speaking of St. Clement's elevation to 
the See of Rome, styles him the third Bishop 
from the death of the apostles.* 

St. Irenseus thus expresses himself on the see 
of Rome : " Ad hanc ecclesiam, propter potenti- 
" orem principalitatem, necesse est oranem con- 
" venire ecclesiam ; hoc est, eos qui sunt undi- 
" que fideies." Mr. Faber thus translates the 
passage in a note at p. 345 : " To the Roman 

* Post Anacletum tertio loco ab apostolis, episcopatum sor- 
titur Clemens. Iren. adv. Haer. lib. III. c. 3, § 2, quoted by 
Mr. Faber. 



424 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part ill. 



" church, on account of its more potent princi- 

" parity, it is necessary that every church should 

" resort ; that is to say, those of the faithful who 

" dwell on every side of it." The text does not 

say, those of the faithful who dwell on every side 

of it ; but the faithful who are on every side. He 

had just said every church ; therefore he adds 

likewise, all the faithful. And in fact, in the 

time of St. Irenaeus, the churches of Smyrna and 

Corinth had already recurred to Rome in affairs 

of importance. It is to be observed that the 

word resort, which Mr. Faber prefers to agree 

with, which we commonly employ, renders very 

energetically the preeminence of the Roman see : 

for people only resort to superior authority* 

* In a note, p. 346, Mr. Faber supposes that in the above 
passage St. Irenaeus recommends the circumjacent churches to 
resort to Rome partly to inspect the autographs of the apostles, 
in case of any doctrinal difficulty. Let him attend on this sub- 
ject to the following admirable observations of a celebrated Ger- 
man divine : " Qui ecclesiam sine litteris scriptis fundavit, mul- 
tisque annis conservavit, ipse et sine autographis veram in ea fi- 
de in, ac puram doctrinam conservavit servatque. Nec unquam 
Jesus Christus dixerat, qui non legerit codicem sacrum, sed qui 
non audierit ecclesiam, sit quasi ethnicus et publicanus ; nec un- 
quam S, Paulus suis mandavit, ut codicem aut epistolas custo- 
dirent ; bene tamen depositum fidei, quod tradidit ipsis." 

Binterim Epist. Cath. de lingua originali N. Test. — Note of 
the Translator. 



SUPREMACY.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 425 

Tertullian, who was converted at Rome, to- 
wards the middle of the second century, and who 
lived afterwards under the primates of Africa, 
gives to the bishop of Rome, the same title which 
we give at this day, that of sovereign pontiff. 
This Mr. Faber admits : but he wrangles about 
St. Cyprian, and proves nothing after all, but 
that this learned and illustrious primate of Car- 
thage admitted no infallibility in the Pope, no 
more than Firmilian, the churches of the islands, 
and of Africa. It is utterly false that St. Cy- 
prian ever opposed or disputed that Pope Ste- 
phen was the successor of St. Peter. St. Cyprian 
wrote as follows to Antonianus : " Cornelius has 
"just been made bishop of Rome, the place of 
" Fabian, that is, that of Peter, and the step of 
" the sacerdotal chair having become vacant." 
Nothing certainly could be more clear and 
precise. 

The passage of St. Cyprian, which Mr. Faber 
would turn against the holy see, becomes even 
stronger in its favour and more decisive, by his 
own explanation of it. You will see this by the 
note at p. 348 of Mr. Faber's book ; " Cyprian 
44 speaks of one chair founded upon Peter by the 



426 ANSWER TO THE [ PARX m . 

" voice of the Lord By this chair, he meant, 

" not the see of Rome in particular, but the chair 
" of the collective united episcopate in general/ 5 
If this be the case, it is most evident that not only 
the chair of Rome, but all the episcopal chairs in 
the world are founded upon Peter, and conse- 
quently upon his successors. It is impossible to 
say more for the universal supremacy of the see 
of Rome : see then how error betrays itself ! 

The Greeks acknowledged the primacy of ju- 
risdiction in the Holy Father at the council of 
Florence, and more remotely in that of Lyons, as 
they had done from the beginning of Christi- 
anity to the time of Photius. On that account 
the deputies of the holy see presided by univer- 
sal consent at the first council of Nice, at that of 
Constantinople, &c. For that reason St. Poly- 
carp, at 90 years of age, crossed the seas, and 
went to render an account to Pope Anicetus of 
the reasons which attached the churches of Asia 
to the custom of celebrating Easter on the 14th 
day of the moon : it was moreover on that ac- 
count that the Corinthians sent a deputation, not 
to St. Clement, who was not then in the chair of 
St. Peter, as Mr. Faber seems to suppose, but to 



REUNION] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 427 

St. Anacletus, to induce him to interpose his au- 
thority to repress the schism which threatened 
their church. 

LI1. — I must beg Mr. Faber to explain, why, in 
his discussion of the claims of the holy see to su- 
premacy, from the Holy Scriptures, he chose to 
pass over in silence the celebrated text ; feed my 
lambs, — -feed my lambs, — feed my sheep. Here 
are most certainly universal superintendance and 
jurisdiction given to St. Peter, and in his person 
to his successors. If Mr. Faber has any desire to 
be comprised in the flock of Jesus Christ, he 
must acknowledge the shepherd placed at the 
head of it by our divine Saviour. If he persists 
in refusing to acknowledge him, he voluntarily 
separates himself from the sheep and lambs of 
Jesus Christ. I seriously invite him, his readers 
and mine, to meditate on this awful consequence, 
and apply it in earnest to themselves. 

Project for Reunion. 

LI11. — To my great surprise, Mr. Faber ap- 
pears at p. 355 to represent me as a kind of ple- 
nipotentiary to the Anglican church to bring- 
about a reconciliation between her and ourselves. 



428 ANSWER TO THE [ PART ni , 

I am represented as undertaking to promise for 
the Catholic church, and propose concessions on 
the one hand and adoptions on the other. This 
reminds me of what Lord Chesterfield writes to 
his son, which I also recommend to Mr. Faber : 
" See what you see ; read what you read." He 
did not read what he read ; he read what he did 
not and could not read in my book, for I have 
written no such thing. Nevertheless I can hardly 
find fault with Mr. Faber, since some of my own 
countrymen have given into the same mistake, if 
I may credit reports which I have heard. I must 
rectify the error of both parties. I did then ad- 
vance that though faith is unchangeable, disci- 
pline is not so ; and that if concessions on the 
former were impossible, they might be made on 
the latter. I named some of these possible con- 
cessions, after the example of Bossuet, choosing, 
as he did, such as would be best relished by Pro- 
testants. 

But it is one thing to say that such or such 
concessions might be made, and another, to pro- 
mise that they will be " freely conceded." Here 
are two questions : the first may be decided by 
any individual ; the second, by the Church alone. 



REUNION.] 



DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



429 



What are the articles of discipline susceptible of 
change ? All. What are those which it would 
be expedient to change, for obtaining the return 
of a separated people ? To the Church alone be- 
longs the right to answer. 

For many years have I ardently desired the re- 
turn of the nations departed from unity. For 
many years it has appeared to me that it would 
not be impossible to bring them back : and my 
reading and reflections, no less than my desires, 
have spontaneously turned to an object so much 
wished for by all good men. 

1 have thought that the period in which we 
live, presented more favourable chances of re- 
union among Christians than any time preced- 
ing. On the one hand, three centuries of com- 
motions, of overthrows, of animated controversies, 
of intestine and cruel wars have fatigued the 
earth : on the other, the world is terrified at the 
number of sects which the leading principle of 
the reformation has produced, and after them, 
the incredulity which has already caused so many 
revolutions, and threatens nations and sovereigns 
with yet more.* It must be evident that if tem- 
* " Divisions in religion when multiplied, are sources of athe- 



430 ANSWER TO THE [part ni. 

poral interests formerly induced princes to adopt 
the reformation, temporal interests of a higher 
nature involving their very existence ought in 
these days to convince them, that there can be no 
repose and no security for them, but under the 
guardianship of unity, and of one supreme au- 
thority in matters of revelation. I have said to 
myself many times, will not Christians at 
length listen to their own experience ? Will 
they condemn themselves to pass their days in 
dissentions and troubles ; and leave the same 
inheritance to their posterity? Redeemed by 
the same blood, regenerated by the same bap- 
tism, called to the same hopes, to the happiness 
of another world, will they never give each other 
the hand of union in this ? Will they be for ever 
seen separated in communion, prayer, and wor- 
ship ? God our Saviour declared that he would 
have on earth but one sheepfold, one flock, one 

ism :" so said Bacon ; and never was the assertion so fatally 
verified as it has been in our days. 

" By so many paradoxes, the foundations of our religion are 
" shaken, the principal articles are called in question, heresies 
" enter in crowds into the churches of Christ, and the road is 
" thrown open to atheism." Sturmer, Ratio ineundce concordice 
An. 1579, p. 2. 



REUNION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 431 

shepherd ; and can they in defiance of the order 
by him established, feel assurance and delight in 
a multitude of flocks and sheep folds ? No ; 
there must either be a speedy end to this disor- 
der, or the termination of all human things. 

In the midst of these reflections, I became very 
sensible that to lead mankind to one belief, the 
first step must be to prove its truth. I was 
perfectly aware of the difficulty of such an 
undertaking ; nor should I have attempted to 
surmount it, had I reckoned solely upon my own 
ability. My only confidence was in Him, who 
had so long inspired me with the thought and 
resolution. I never ceased to implore his assist- 
ance and all-powerful grace in the course of 
my researches and labours. Subsequently, the 
result was submitted to enlightened friends : I 
wished it to be placed before well-informed per- 
sons of other communions. It was so ; and not 
always without approbation, and some effect. — 
An antagonist has at length arisen, who cer- 
tainly is not wanting in penetration of mind, 
facility of language, or elegance of style ; why 
am I not permitted to add, in sincerity, love of 
union and experience in matters of theology ! 



432 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

By turns he extols the character of the author, 
with whom he is unacquainted, and abuses the 
book which is before him. He is wrong in both : 
in his commendations, which unhappily the 
author does not in any degree deserve ; and in 
his critique upon the Discussion Amicale, which 
this answer will, I flatter myself, have placed 
above the reach of his censures. He decomposes 
my proofs, adds or retrenches, changes my 
words, palms upon me his own, substitutes his 
own reasoning for mine, and what is still more 
culpable, is equally unceremonious with the 
ancient Fathers. With a boldness hitherto un- 
heard of, he makes them say what they do not 
say, and even the very opposite to what they do 
say ; yes, the very opposite ; I am truly sorry to 
have to reproach him with such conduct. I 
should never have expected to detect such pro- 
ceedings in an Englishman. I knew a great 
many during a residence of thirteen years among 
them ; but 1 never met with one of this stamp. 
The most intellectual writer may undoubtedly 
be allowed to be no theologian ; but never to 
act dishonourably. 

At page 370, Mr. Faber attempts to show that 



REUNION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 4'33 

my attacks upon the reformation would equally 
fall upon Christianity itself, and does not per- 
ceive that his own parallel between them is very 
closely allied to blasphemy. Yet he knows 
that the Christian revelation came to us from 
heaven ; that it presented itself to the world 
with proofs of its divinity ; that the apostles, 
their disciples and their proselytes attracted 
mankind by their virtues and heavenly doc- 
trines ; that they suffered with resignation, 
without inflicting' suffering on any ; that they 
shed no blood but their own, and prayed for 
their persecutors; he knows, in fine, that the 
preaching of the gospel was by the command of 
God, and the establishment of the Church was a 
work purely divine. But what were the re- 
formers ? They have answered the question 
themselves. Was it — 1 will not say by the com- 
mand of God — but purely for his glory that 
they announced their doctrines ? " This quarrel 
" did not begin for the honour of God ; nor will 
" it end by it," said Luther on one occasion.* 

* At the dispute at Leipzig, in 1519, by order of Prince 
George of Saxony, between Kckins of Ingolstatt, Carlostadt and 
Luther. See Hist, of 70 years, dating from 1500,'6y Laurence 

Ff 



434 ANSWER TO THE [part in. 

Did they bear contradictions with Christian 
humility, and pray for those who condemned 
their preaching ? Luther exhausted his threats 
and imprecations against the holy see and the 
Church in communion with Rome.* Calvin 
called those monsters who opposed his doctrines, 
and wished them to be treated as he had treated 
Seryetus.-|* Zwinglius at the head of his troops 
received that death which he would have dealt 



Surius, the Carthusian, translated by Estourmeaux. ^d edit. 
1572/ Paris. I£mser an auricular witness reproached LutheF 
with this, and he did not deny it. 

* " By my hand his death-blow shall be given," Luther wrote 
in 1520; "my doctrine shall prevail, and the Pope shall fall. — 
" He h;is refused peace, therefore he shall have war ; we shall 
" see who will he tired first, the Pope or Luther .... Let us 
44 assail, assail with all sorts of arms which we can devise, this 
44 master of perdition, these Popes, cardinals and all this Roman 
" rabble and ordure : let us wash our hands in their blood." — 
And in his epistle to the people of Strasbourg he testifies, that 
" he did not engage so deeply in this quarrel for the love of 
44 Christ, but through his hatred of the Pope, against whom he 
44 proclaims a war of fire and blood." 

+ Call to mind here his letter to the Marquis of Poet quoted 
already. — "Calvini discipuli, ubicunque invaluerunt, imperia 
4t turbavehe :" says Grotius against Rivet. " Calvinism must 
44 necessarily produce civil wars, and shake the foundations of 
44 states .... there is no country where the religions of Luther 
44 and Calvin have appeared, without causing an effusion of 
44 blood." Voltaire Steele de Louis XIV. ch, 33. 



INQUISITION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



4:35 



upon his enemies. And what was the tendency 
of their principles ? To ruin our mysteries, and 
overturn religion.* Who then was the real in- 
stigator of the reformation, and whose work 
must we all call it ? I leave you to answer. 

The Inquisition. 

LiV. — 1 know nothing worse than a man of 
genius without good faith : he poisons what he 
touches at pleasure, and presents to his readers, 
under the attractive air of truth, what he knows 
himself to be false. How often has it pained me 
to apply this reflection to the Rector of Long 

* u From thy doctrine and that of all thy accomplices and 
"followers, all the condemned heresies revive, and the whole 
" service of God is repudiated. At what period were there 
66 ever more sacrileges of men consecrated to God, than under 
" thy gospel ? When was rebellion against the magistracy 
66 more frequent than during thy gospel ? When have there 
« been seen more pillage of churches, more larceny and robbery? 
** At what time had Wittemberg more unfrocked monks than 
" at present? When were wives taken from their husbands to 
" be given to others, as under thy gospel ? When did men 
u commit more adulteries, than since thou wrotest that if a man 
H can hope for no issue by his wife, he may take another, 
" and that her husband is obliged to support the offspring which 
" may follow ; and that a woman may act the same in the like 
" case, &c. &c." Reply of Prince George of Saxony to Luther 
in 1526. 

F f 2 



436 ANSWER TO THE [ PART m . 

Newton ? He undertakes at p. 372, No. If. to 
represent me to his countrymen as a friend and 
partisan of the inquisition ; and that they may 
not doubt his sincerity, he appears to translate a 
note which I beseech you to read in my 2d vol. 
p. p. 416, 417. He suppresses and adds, as he 
pleases, so that the words which he attributes to 
me express sufficiently well the very opposite to 
what I declared. u I do not undertake/' said I 
at the beginning, 44 to justify the tribunals of the 
" inquisition in theory and principle." He cer- 
tainly read this first sentence carefully, because 
he has taken good care to suppress it ; and 
although I there give notice that I am not going 
to defend the inquisition, he represents me as its 
defender. 44 They are accused (and would to 
44 God it. were with less reason !) of having 
" carried severity to injustice and cruelty." Is 
this the exclamation of a man applauding the 
severities, the injustice and cruelty of those 
tribunals, or of one deeply lamenting them ? Is 
it taking up their defence to consider them in 
such a light ? Or is it not rather condemning 
them with feelings of pain and disapprobation ? 
" Why did they not imitate those of Italy P — 



INQUISITION] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 437 

" Without defiling, themselves with innocent blood, 
,4 they loould have obtained the success which sove- 
" reigns expected from their vigilance The 
Rector read this sentence, and suppresses it! 
Bat is it defending the Spanish inquisition, to 
reproach it as I have done above ? Could Mr. 
Faber have expressed his disapprobation more 
forcibly than \ have done by those words which 
he has purposely suppressed ; " without defiling 
" themselves with innocent blood ?" After ob- 
serving with writers worthy of credit that the 
number of innocent victims had been much ex- 
aggerated, I add : " had this not been the case, 
" Spain, while she reproached herself with all 
" these cruel and unjust executions, would not 
" have to regret the lot of other states, where 
" religious wars have shed a deluge of human 
" blood, &c. ,? The Rector makes me say : " But 
" Spain, blessed with the inquisition, has been 
" happily exempt" This little interpolation is 
very ingeniously put in, to keep in countenance 
the accusation which the Bachelor wishes to 
bring against me, and at the same time to stand 
as evidence of his own candour. 

He would have me clearly point out what I 



438 



ANSWER TO THE 



PART III. 



mean by innocent and guilty victims. But 
surely I was nowise obliged to do this. He may 
divide them as he pleases ; 1 have no objection. 
The discrimination is no part of my concern : I 
am not writing the history of the inquisition. I 
gave notice that I should defend neither its tri- 
bunals, nor its unjust and cruel executions ; that 
I confined myself to the consideration of its gene- 
ral consequences relative to the condition of 
Spain, as the English author whom I quoted had 
done before me. During my long residence in 
England, I never met with any man of informa- 
tion and good faith, who would undertake to 
justify the revolution of 1688 in its principles 
and the means by which it was effected ; but I 
met many who rejoiced at its results, on account 
of the actual prosperity of the country. While 
they considered it unjust in its origin, they held 
it to be advantageous in its effects. This is very 
much the view which I have taken of the inqui- 
sition, which by preserving Spain in unity of 
faith, has saved it in our days from certain and 
total ruin. 

" I may be mistaken ;** says Mr. Faber, p. 374, 
" but 1 have always understood, that the special 



INQUISITION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 439 

" object of the inquisition was to take cognizance 
" of what the Latin church (he means no doubt 
" the Catholic church) pronounces to be heresy " 
He will be very glad, I imagine, to learn what we 
are informed on this subject by a man to whom 
we may all refer, the Abbe Fleury, ( Instit. au 
droit Can. v. 2, 12mo. p. 86, and 90 Paris 1763.) 
" The origin of the inquisition is traced up to 
" Theodosius the Great, against the Manicheans. 
" His law of the year 382 is addressed to the pre- 
" feet of the East. In 1224, the emperor Frede- 
44 rick 2nd issued four edicts with orders to the 
44 secular judges to pursue and punish by fire 
44 obstinate heretics condemned by the church 
44 .... In France, it began against the Albigenses 
44 at Toulouse in 1229 ; in Arragon, in 1233, but 
44 very feebly, until Ferdinand, having expelled 
44 the Moors, and wishing to confirm the pre- 
44 tended conversions of the Moors and Jews, who 
44 obtained leave to remain in Spain by becom- 
44 ing Christians, solicited of Pope Sixtus IV in 
44 1483 a bull to nominate Cardinal Turre-cre- 
44 mata grand inquisitor and president of the 
44 council of the inquisition .... It is this coun- 
44 cil which makes regulations, decides differences 



440 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

" between particular inquisitions, punishes their 
" faults and those of the inferior ministers, and 
" receives all appeals. This council is exclu- 
" sively dependent on the king." 

Were I a member of the Spanish church, which 
Mr. Faber is so zealous in stigmatizing, I should 
address him thus : " Be so good, Sir, as to look 
a little more at home. Think of the pious and 
illustrious foundress of your church by law estab- 
lished, to the supreme governess in things spiri- 
tual as well as temporal : think of the mild and 
gentle laws which she published against such of 
her subjects as would not join her in renouncing 
the religion of their fathers: think of the searches, 
the domiciliary visits made by her orders to dis- 
cover the smallest traces of the Catholic worship 
and ministry ; of the savage cruelty with which 
the priests were pursued, of the barbarous joy 
even in the capital when any had been discovered 
under their disguise, or in their secret hiding- 
places. Think of the instruments of torture 
which awaited them in their prisons, and the in- 
geniously contrived machines* employed with 

* <c Atrociora pasnarum ingenia." Terlull. de resur. carnis. c. G. 
The following were the kind? of torture chiefly employed in 
the Tower. 



INQUISITION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



441 



cold ferocity to punish them. Think of the cries 
of pain, the lengthened groans of innocent and 

1. The rack was a large open frame of oak, raised three feet 
from the ground. The prisoner was laid under it, on his back, 
on the floor : his wrists and ancles were attached by cords to 
two rollers at the ends of the frame : these were moved by levers 
in opposite directions, till the body rose to a level with the frame. 
Questions were then put ; and, if the answers did not prove satis- 
factory, the sufferer was stretched more and more till the bones 
started from their sockets. 

2. The scavenger's daughter was a hcop of iron, so called, 
consisting of two parts, fastened to each other by a hinge. The 
prisoner was made to kneel on the pavement, and to contract 
himself into as small a compass as he could. Then the execu- 
tioner, kneeling on his shoulders, and having introduced the hoop 
under his legs, compressed the victim close together till he was 
able to fasten the extremities over the small of the back. The 
time allotted to this kind of torture was an hour and a half, du- 
ring which time it commonly happened that from excess of 
compression the blood started from the nostrils ; sometimes, it 
was believed, from the extremities of the hands and feet. See 
Bartoli, 250. 

3. Iron gauntlets, which could be contracted by the aid of a 
screw. They served to compress the wrists, and to suspend the 
prisoner in the air, from two distant points of a beam. He was 
placed on three pieces of wood, piled one on the other, which, 
when his hands had been made fast, were successively with- 
drawn from under his feet. " I felt," says F. Gerard, one of 
the sufferers, " the chief pain in my breast, belly, arms, and 
" hands. I thought that all the blood in my body had run into 
" my arms, and began to burst out of my finger ends. This was 
u a mistake ; but the arms swelled, till the gauntlets were buried 
" within the flesh. After being thus suspended an hour, I 
<; fainted : and when I came to myself, I found the executioners 



442 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part hi. 



resigned victims ; of the streams of blood which 
gashed out beneath the pressure of iron, from 
their dislocated members ; and after those horri- 
ble tortures, think of the execution which termi- 

" supporting me in their arms : they replaced the pieces of wood 
" under my feet; but as soon as I was recovered, removed them 
" again. Thus I continued hanging for the space of five hours, 
u during which I fainted eight or nine times." A pud Bartoli,4l8. 

4. A fourth kind of torture was a cell called little ease." It 
was of so small dimensions, and so constructed, that the prisoner 
could neither stand, walk, sit, or lie in it at full length. He was 
compelled to draw himself up in a squatting posture, and so re- 
mained during several days. 

I will add a few lines from Rishton's Diary, that the reader 
may form some notion of the proceedings in the Tower. 

Dec. 5, 1580. Several catholics were brought from different 
prisons. 

Dec. 10. Thomas Cottam and Luke Kirbye, priests (two of 
the number,) suffered compression in the scavenger's daughter 
for more than an hour. Cottam bled profusely from the nose. 

Dec. 15. Ralph Sherwine and Robert Johnson, priests, were 
severely tortured on the rack. 

Dec. 16. Ralph Sherwine was tortured a second time on the 
rack. 

Dec. 31. John Hart, after being chained five days to the floor, 
was led to the rack. Also Henry Orton, a lay gentleman. 

1581. Jan. 3. Christopher Thompson, an aged priest, was 
brought to the Tower, and racked the same day. 

Jan. 14. Nicholas Roscaroc, a lay gentleman, was racked. 

Thus he continues till June 21, 1585, when he was dis- 
charged. See his Diarium, at the end of his edition of Sanders. 
Rev. Dr. LinganVs History of England^ vol. viii, 8vo. Note U. 
p. 521. 



INQUISITION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 443 

nated their martyrdom and their life, when they 
were dragged from prison to the place of execu- 
tion, and the hangman after letting them hang a 
moment on the gallows, cut them down while 
still alive, opened their bodies, tore out their pal- 
pitating bowels & threw them into a cauldron in 
the sight and amid the furious acclamations of 
an exulting populace. Read the history of this 
period so faithfully written by your immortal 
Lingard, whom you have reason to place at the 
head of your historians ; or in the Memoirs of 
Missionary priests by the venerable Challoner. 
Come Sir, read these works, and be in future at 
least a little more reserved in your declarations 
against foreigners. But no ; rather unite with 
me in drawing a veil over these scenes of horror; 
let us sigh over our ages of barbarism, and the 
errors of human nature. Where is the nation 
that has not had to lament her own share of 
them ? The inquisition of France after being 
softened down for a long time, disappeared alto- 
gether. Your own has much relaxed in rigour 
of late years : let it then disappear entirely; and 
restore to repose, to happiness and to their coun- 
try eight millions of your fellow-subjects, whom 



444 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

you have deprived of these blessings for near 
three centuries, for no other crime than their un- 
shaken devotedness to the religion of your fore- 
fathers. 

Intolerance. 

LV. — -In the last article, and in twenty others 
before it, you must, Sir, have admired the dex- 
terity with which Mr. Faber changes, turns and 
distorts my expressions, gives them any sense he 
pleases, and substitutes for what I say, what he 
wishes to make me say. He possesses this art in 
a superior degree : I cannot cease to wonder at 
it, for never should I have looked for such a ta- 
lent in England ; and I am willing to believe 
that you could not find such another specimen 
in your country. In the concluding pages of 
his book particularly he quite surpasses himself. 
For instance, he has chosen to exhibit me to his 
countrymen as intolerant ; and you shall see how 
he proceeds ; p. 378. " The bishop having thus 
" censured the reformation and vindicated the 
" inquisition, nothing more was wanting to the 
" rotundity of his system than that he should 
* bear his testimony against freedom of religious 



lNTOT>ERAXCE.]DIFFICU LTIES OF ROMANISM. 445 

" worship." And then he goes on with an air 
of great seriousness and in a very angry manner 
to refute an opinion which he attributes to me 
without the least reason upon earth. For he well 
knows in soul and conscience, that I do not say 
a syllable about " freedom of religious worship f? 
so far am I from imputing it as a " crying abo- 
mination" to his church.* 

He has too much penetration not to perceive 
the difference between this sentence: " The ad- 
" der, which the church of England thus warms 
" only for the purpose of stinging herself to death, 
" is freedom of religious worship :" and the 
following; : " I see that the Established Church 
" carries in her bosom the principle of her destruc- 
" tion in that liberty of making a religion 

44 AND FORM OF WORSHIP FOR THEMSELVES, which 

" she cannot now deny to any, after claiming it 
" for herself." The latter sentence is mine ; the 
former belongs to Mr. Faber, who artfully sub- 
stitutes it for mine, that he may ground an accu- 
sation against me. But let me beg of him to 
take back his own ; I have certainly no wish to 

* See Discussion Amicale^ vol. ii, pp. 409, 410. and vol. i, pp. 
149, 150, 162, 163. 



446 ANSWER TO THE [part ill- 

deprive him of his property. I much doubt how- 
ever, if his cunning will do him honour in your 
eves, and before a nation so universally upright 
and generous as his own. 

Mr. Faber very loudly proclaims the tolerance 
of his church. It is true that it extends far to 
those sects which like that church herself have 
proceeded from the fundamental principle of 
preferring private interpretation to the authority 
of the universal Church ; a principle which 1 have 
designated as the cause of inevitable destruction 
to your church. But even to the present day 
her tolerance has been little better than a name 
towards Catholics, that heroic race of confessors 
of the faith, who for three centuries have suffered 
so many evils from father to son, and still endure 
so many privations for having constantly refused 
to sacrifice unity to the anti-christian principle 
of schism and divisions. Even when in 1791 the 
English government was willing to allow them 
to celebrate their worship with open doors, it 
took care to punish them another way, by a re- 
fusal indefinitely prolonged to restore their an- 
cient civil and political rights. Has my own 
country, France, though represented as so intole- 



I stole* E.]l> 1 1,1 OF ROM A XI -iM. 447 

rant by Mr. Faber, thus treated, or does it thus 
treat its Protestant subjects ? Call to mind 
Sully, Turenne, Marshal Saxe ; and in our own 
days you will find Protestants of various com- 
munions admitted to every post in her army, 
navy, and administration ; sitting in both cham- 
bers of parliament and even in the king's privy- 
council. If Mr. Faber would see complete tole- 
ration, let him come over to France. Truly it is 
something more than logical unskilfulness to ex- 
alt his own country at the expense of ours, on 
the score of toleration. 

The Established Church, who in despite of her 
39 articles, royal proclamations and acts of par- 
liament, cannot prevent sects from swarming 
around her to her own cost, can claim no merit 
for leaving them freedom of religious worship. 
They have sprung, like herself, from one and the 
same principle, though at various periods. They 
form together one same family, and are all sisters. 
It is true that they wage deadly war against her 
who is the most favoured and exalted, for which 
I cannot commend them ; for I dislike hostilities, 
and above all intestine hostilities. Yet 1 cannot 
lose sight of the rights and titles which they all 



448 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

derive from one common origin ; they are such 
as cannot be justly contested by the church by 
law established. They exercise them, and will 
exercise them ; — they undermine her, and they 
will undermine her, as 1 see great reason to fear ; 
until they see her expire in the midst of them 
through exhaustion and inanition. 

This freedom of religions worship, which " the 
" bishop censures in the church of England/' 
continues Mr. Faber, 44 is a principle, which the 
44 church of Rome has ever abhorred." It is 
written then that the Rector of Long Newton 
shall be wrong even to the end. Let him attend 
to the following : 44 Above all things, never force 
44 your subjects to change their religion. No hu- 
44 man power can force the impenetrable intrench- 
44 ment of liberty of heart. Compulsion can 
44 never persuade men ; it only makes hypocrites. 
44 When kings interfere with religion, instead of 
44 protecting, they enslave it. Grant to all civil 
44 toleration ; not approving all as indifferent, 
44 but suffering with patience what God permits, 
44 and endeavouring to bring men back by gen- 
44 tie persuasion." This advice given by an illus- 
trious Catholic bishop to the Pretender, son of 



INTOLERANCE,] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 449 

James H, would be given at this day by the 
bishops of France, if any occasion required the 
expression of their sentiments. 1 know not one 
among them who would not feel it an honour to 
subscribe to such advice. But were Mr. Faber 
called to discuss the Catholic question on the 
episcopal bench, would he adopt the decision you 
have just read ? Would he express himself in 
such terms in favour of his oppressed country- 
men, the Catholics of the three kingdoms ? Or 
if he were consulted by the bench of bishops at 
the next session, would he counsel them to hold 
such language fearlessly in the house of peers ? 
Let his readers judge by his Difficulties of Ro- 
manism. Then let him no longer raise a trophy 
with his pretended toleration : but let him 
openly confess that Protestants have found, and 
still find from our bishops that ample toleration, 
which the Catholics have never yet obtained from 
the clergy of the church of England.* 

* Many affect to apprehend what the Catholics would do, if 
they were once emancipated. Independent of their protesta- 
tions so often and solemnly repeated on this head, it is difficult 
to conceive what great influence or authority they could derive 
from emancipation. But if you really wish to be more secure 
from their future dispositions, I say, prove yourselves just towards 

G g 



450 



ANSWER TO THE 



[part hi, 



Recapitulation. 
LV1. — At length Mr. Faber proceeds to sum up 
at the end of his work. But in what terms? 
My pen transcribes them with horror and indig- 
nation. The bishop, says he, p. 382, " calls 
" upon us to unite, or rather to submit, to his 
" church : and as the consistent advocate of that 
" church, he vindicates idolatry, stigmatizes the 
" reformation,* patronises the eve of St. Bartho- 
" lomew/j* lays the blame of persecution upon 
" the persecuted, .... and censures freedom of 
u religious worship/' There is not one of these 
lines which does not contain a most splendid 

them in the first place ; restore their rights which you have so 
long withheld. Then be generous, and make them some amends 
for the past. You will have a far better hold on them by kind- 
ness than by cruelty ; you w ill bind them in the bonds of grati- 
tude. It is of sovereign efficacy in noble hearts, born in priva- 
tion, and long fed with humiliation and bitterness. 

* She has stigmatized herself, I had only to let her speak her 
own language. 

+ Speaking of calamities which Europe would never have 
known but for the reformation, I said, vol. ii, p. 414: u Nor 
" would France have had the shame of that frightful night of 
66 the St. Bartholomew and the charitable Rector of Long 
Newton purposely puts a misconstruction on these words, to 
change an expression of horror into an apology for a massacre 
executed under favour of darkness. 



ov CLUSION".] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 451 

falsehood. Every one of these accusations is 
diametrically opposite to my principles, senti- 
ments and expressions. In truth it is a cruel 
thing to be thus depicted in such odious colours 
before a nation whom I honour, and among whom 
I ever received marks of esteem, protection, and 
bounty. Yet I shall make but one reply to the 
calumnies of Mr. Faber ; it shall be briefly this : 
I beseech his readers and mine to forgive him, 
as I freely forgive him myself before men and 
before God. 

Conclusion. 

LVH. — And now, Sir, I have finished the task 
which I undertook at your solicitation. You are 
now enabled to form a judgment of my antago- 
nist, in whom you had placed confidence. He 
stands before you, not, I feel assured, such as he 
at first appeared in your estimation, but such as 
he is in reality. You will now know how to ap- 
preciate his merit in theological knowledge, his 
veracity in quotation, his accuracy in reasoning, 
his love of truth, his inclination for peace, his 
desire of reunion, his sincerity in praising, and 

his fidelity in accusing. Grant him, if you will, 

eg 2 



452 ANSWER TO THE [PART III. 

ease and address in the use of his pen ; allow 
him, with all my heart, the skill to mutilate a 
passage, to substitute his own ideas for those of 
his opponent, and by this honourable process to 
bring odium against his person, and deprive him 
of the estimation of the public ; and in fine, the 
art of colouring falsehood and decorating error 
with the ornaments of truth. Add to these, if 
you will, an affectation of candour even at the 
moment when he himself disregards it ; a habit 
of disguising a premeditated insult by empty 
compliment ; assurance in his pretensions, and a 
tone of decision in assertions of the most palpa- 
ble mendacity. This judgment will result from 
the answer you have now read ; and I do not 
conceive it possible to allow him any other me- 
rit, without attributing what does not belong 
to him * 

Nevertheless I beseech you to bear in mind 
that I only speak of the writer, and not of the 
person : it is only my province to judge of the 
author of the Difficulties of Romanism, and by 
no means of the reverend pastor of Long Newton, 

* I am sometimes tempted to think that he has served an ap- 
prenticeship in the school of Voltaire. 



conclusion.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 



453 



to whom I am far from wishing to deny pastoral 
and affectionate zeal, and every amiable and so- 
cial quality. But why have I not the same hap- 
piness as his parishioners, that of rinding* these 
in his book, as they may enjoy them in his dis- 
courses, and to observe that sincere and tender 
interest for the Mother-Church, which he, no 
doubt, testifies for his church at Long* Newton ! 
Perhaps in writing for his cause, he may have 
thought it a duty to dissemble his real senti- 
ments on the solidity of my proofs. Can he have 
so far honoured the Discussion Amicale, as to 
consider it dangerous to his party, and therefore 
conclude that it was necessary to discredit the 
work and its author in public opinion ? 

However this may be, 1 found myself compelled 
in my reply to defend the Catholic doctrine 
against his unjust attacks : and this could not be 
done without producing his false allegations, un- 
faithful quotations, false reasoning, cunning and 
unworthy artifices. Why did he stoop to employ 
them ? I have been obliged, against my inclina- 
tion, to exhibit them in open day. But I have 
discharged this painful duty without passion or 
animosity ; rather indeed with an uniform feel- 



454 ANSWER TO THE [part III. 

ing of pity. How much has my patience been 
tried ? — the whole task appeared to me ungrate- 
ful and revolting ! 1 have endured it once, dis- 
gusting as it was ; but I could not support it a 
second time. And F declare beforehand that let 
him write henceforth what he pleases, I shall not 
read a line of his production. I have taken ad- 
vantage of the opportunity which he has afforded 
me, and have proved the errors of his creed, and 
the apostolicity of ours. I have insisted more 
plainly and forcibly upon our Eucharistic dog- 
mas, because he represented them as the princi- 
pal subject of division between us. From the 
conformity of our faith with that of the primi- 
tive ages, you must have concluded that the 
doctrine of your church is essentially opposed 
to that of the primitive Church, to that of the 
apostles, and of Jesus Christ. 

LVIII. — Well then, you will say, what am I to 
do, and all those of my communion, who value 
above every thing else the salvation of their 
souls ? I will answer you candidly and with per- 
fect conviction. Had there existed a single rea- 
son to justify the separation in the 16th century, 
or did there exist one to justify the actual sepa- 



CONCLUSION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM, 455 

ration and schism of the various societies of Pro- 
testants, I should say to you — remain in your 
own. But I say — not only do 1 know of none, 
but I see most clearly there could have existed 
none. Bring together all the writings published 
by the reformed communions for these three cen- 
turies ; congregate all the enlightened men who 
exist in these communions ; you will never ex- 
tract from either any one available and peremp- 
tory cause, to authorize at the time the original 
schism, or its continuation in our days. There- 
fore Sir, go out from it. You are now too well 
admonished, and too enlightened to be excusable 
if you continue therein. With great reason do 
you attach the highest importance to the salva- 
tion of your soul. Well, Sir, I declare to you 
distinctly, that you must secure its salvation 
in unity, in the Mother Church, the faithful 
guardian of the primitive faith, the sole heiress 
of the promises, ever pure in her doctrine, incor- 
ruptible in her dogmas, and pious in her worship. 
If you have detected some abuses in her children ; 
— and where will not some abuses be found ? — be 
assured that if they were pernicious, she herself 
would be the first to condemn them 5 if not per- 



456 ANSWER TO THE [part hi. 

nicious, she would tolerate them for the sake of 
peace. Do you in like manner ; and do not 
imagine it obligatory to observe certain minute 
practices which she never commanded, but which 
she suffers without either approving or prohibit- 
ing them. Do not suffer yourself to be with- 
held by such unimportant matters ; look to 
what is essential. Return to unity : for without 
that even martyrdom would not save you. — 
Believe me, Sir, you have no room for hesitation. 
Were I to hold a different language, I should 
belie my own conscience, and deceive yours. 

L1X. But, Sir, 1 am far from requiring you to 
depend solely on my opinion. I am prepared 
to offer you, if you please, authorities more 
worthy of your regard, and better calculated to 
bring you to a determination. I will choose 
them from the very bosom of the Reformation. 
I know of none that can be opposed, on the 
questions of which we treat, to Grotius and 
Leibnitz, the honour and admiration of their age, 
as they are of our own, and will be of posterity. 
You may absolutely consider them as the two 
wisest heads of Protestantism. Educated in the 
prejudices of their Communions, attached for a 



CONCLUSION.] DIFFICULTIES OF ROMANISM. 457 

length of years, the former to Calvinistic 
opinions, the latter to those of the Lutherans, 
they emancipated themselves by the force of 
genius The one was long engaged in the 
warmth of religious disputation, the other in 
grave theological discussions ; both made con- 
troverted points their profound study, looking 
with a curious and penetrating eye into Chris- 
tian antiquity ; and both ended by erecting 
immortal monuments to the truth of our doc- 
trines. In his Votum pro pace, the last of his 
polemic productions, the incomparable Grotius 
concludes on every article which divides us, in 
favour of the Catholic doctrine : and Leibnitz in 
his admirable Systema Theologies, the fruit of 
thirty years of research and reflection as he him- 
self wrote to his intimate friends, proves and 
establishes the Catholic faith on the same sub- 
jects, with a degree of erudition, depth, and 
accuracy which could only have belonged to him- 
self or Bossuet. After these illustrious defenders 
furnished even by the Reformation to the Catho- 
lic Church, no more human authorities need be 
investigated. Where could you find any to out- 
balance these two men of transcendant genius ? 



458 ANSWER TO THE [PART III. 

Go then and stand by their side : think as they 
thought ; believe as they believed ; and more 
happy than either of them, begin to practise 
before death overtakes you. 

This is not my counsel alone, though in per- 
fect conformity with my principles. It comes 
to you even from another Protestant, very cele- 
brated in these latter times, and worthy to walk, 
though at a great distance, in the train of the 
two preceding. " Since it is impossible," says 
the Baron de Starck, " to extricate Protestant- 
" ism from its ruins, as I have demonstrated, 
" what will remain for those who have preserved 
" any attachment to Christianity . . . • but to 
" re-unite with the Catholic Church, which, as 
" even Protestants acknowledge, is the preserver 
" of the principal and fundamental truths of 
" Christianity ? This Christianity being totally 

destroyed among Protestants, those who still 
" love and desire it, are absolutely obliged to 
" seek it in the only asylum where they are still 
" sure of finding it."* 

* Entretiens Philosophiques sur la Reunion des differenles 
Communions Chretiennes ; p. 286, of De Kentz' French Trans- 
lation, and p. 220, of the Original German. 



459 



NOTE. 

The translator having been obliged in the 
body of this work to give his own version from 
the author's French for two quotations from 
Bp. Patrick and one from Humphrey Ditton, is 
happily enabled now to present the original 
words of those writers, carefully copied from 
their works. 

The passages from Bp. Patrick quoted at 
page 83. 

" For in all this Christians are agreed, that 
" whatsoever was delivered by Christ from God 
" the Father, or by the apostles from Christ, is 
" to be embraced and firmly retained, whether 
" it be written or not written ; that makes no 
" difference at all, if we can be certain it came 
" from him or them. For what is contained in 
" the holy scripture hath not its authority be- 
" cause it is written, but because it came from 
u God. If Christ said a thing, it is enough ; we 
" ought to submit to it : but we must first know 
" that he said it ; and let the means of knowing 
" it be what they will, if we can certainly know 
" he said it, we yield to it." Introduction, 
parag. iv. p. 8. 

" Whatever is delivered to us by our Loixl 
" Jesus Christ and his apostles, we receive as the 



460 



" word of God, which we think is sufficiently 
" declared in the holy scriptures. But if any 
" one can certainly prove by any authority equal 
" to that which brings the scriptures to us, that 
" there is any thing else delivered by them, we 
" receive that also. The controversy will soon 
" be at an end : we are ready to embrace it, 
" when any such thing can be produced. 

" Nay we have that reverence for those who 
" succeeded the apostles, that what they have 
" unanimously delivered to us as the sense of 
" any doubtful place, we receive it and seek no 
" farther .... 

" In short, traditions we do receive, but not 
" all that are called by that name. Those, 
" which have sufficient authority ; but not those, 
" which are imposed upon us by the sole autho- 
" rity of one particular church, assuming a 
" power over ail the rest." End of 1st part, 
parag. viii. p. 26 and 27. 

The quotation from Humphrey Ditton at 
page 104. 

" They must leave off all this quibbling and 
" disputing, and take whatever they find plainly 
" revealed in the gospel ; remembering that the 
" infinite wisdom and goodness can never pos- 
" sibly oblige them to believe any thing that is 
" really absurd and contradictory, .... yet they 
" may be obliged to believe many things which 
• 4 unconquered prejudice may tell them are 



461 



" absurd and unreasonable, and which they may 
" think to be so, by using themselves to judge of 
" the ways of God too much by human rules 
" and measures." — Discourse concerning the 
Resurrect, of Jesus Christ. — London, 1714, 2d 
Edition, Part /. Sec. 4, p. 15. 



BACON AND KINNEBROOK, 

Printers, Norwich. 



Wn 1 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Jan. 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



